I've been seduced!

[Rags]

We will ATI bash to our heart's content. He started an ATI thread in a MATROX forum. IT is off topic. Many of us have had ATI cards, and will be glad to share our experiences with them. ATI SUCKS when it comes to drivers. Period. They are second only to diamond in the "Shitty Drivers Dep't" IMHO.

Rags

[Guru]

Not to mention that the drivers are huge 13MB!

Guru

------------------
Join the MURC SETI team! | SETI @ MURC

[Nuno]

They have awsome DVD playback ever since the Fury vanilla, though.

[DentyCracker]

ATI=Good Hardware + Shitty Drivers.
Statement is true in General. I do believe that ATI have a shitty attitude towards driver writing. They also are quite stupid. I used to own a Rage IIc which was ok as it was a POS for gaming and I knew that and just wanted drivers that gave me good 2D at the time. I still own a TV Wonder which is a great TV card except that now I have to boot BeOS to watch TV, as if I install the version 1.0 drivers that shipped with the card it trashes EzCD Creator 4. I thought to myself there must be an upgraded version of the software that doesn't do this, so I check ATI's website. Alas there is none available for download. There is however an upgraded version of the software, it is free but you have to order it and they will mail the CD to you (if you live in US or Canada). Luckily I have a mailbox in Florida so I gave them that address. Should get it soon but may have to pay customs duty on it. It seems quite silly to me to go about it this way. Suffice it to say I will NEVER buy another ATI product as long as I live

[Darin]

Um, seems like I started more than I intended. I would consider myself to be a Matrox fan (ever since my first video card puchase... an Ultima 2+ from WAY back), but not a fanatical one. Athough this is a bit off-topic for this board, I posted this here because I was interested in input, and thought I could count on something more than the typical "everthing other than the brand I like sux" comments that are so prevelant in many of the online forums. I've generally considered this to be one of the most mature and level headed forums that I participate in, and I value the opinions of the memebers here.

Despite my respect for Matrox products, I don't believe it's logical to apply a blanket opinion on a product based on a manufacturer. Any company can change their priorities at any time, and their position in various categories (support, quality, speed, stability, innovation, etc.) can change from one product to the next.

I like my G400, and wouldn't consider the current Nvidia products simply because their current offerings sacrifice 2d quality. I have been wanting something faster, with more features, and didn't expect to find something I was interested in until the G800 (or whatever it will be called) came out, but I have been concerned about the appearance of Matrox falling behind. As it turns out, ATI caught me by surprise with what appears to be a decent offering, and I'm just interested to see other opinions. I don't expect to come here & see completely unbiased opinions, but I do expect them to be more rational than the majority of what I can find elsewhere.

[Oracle]

i agree why wont u let ati have a chance hell remeber when everyone though amd was crap (the k5?) and look at how far its come, nvidia is another example (tnt and now geforce) so what if ati has had driver problems what about detonater 3 ? tnt, tnt 2 people have had serious problems and matrox well they've had there fair share of probs

oh and 13meg ? big hell ive d/l a v3 driver and that was 12 meg and does it really matter?

Oracle

------------------
P3 600e @ 700 (6*115)
128mb 100mhz sdram
abit be6-2
matrox g400 max (160/213)
voodoo 3 2000 pci
soundblaster 16pci
4.3gb seagate udma 33
15.3 wd udma 66
creative modem blaster 56k ext
win 98
ie5
direct x 7.0a
pd 6.10beta
tgl 1.3
....................

[This message has been edited by Oracle (edited 31 August 2000).]

[Ashley]

The Rage Fury MAXX actually get enumerated as two completely different devices, and would be a good candidate for dual monitor support under Win2K if it could be retrofitted with a second output (it even has two BIOSes and two oscillators).

The V5 gets enumerated as a single device, with 2 function numbers (4 with the 6000), which is probably the way a Radeon MAXX will do it too.

The G400DH has two "devices" (the G400 itself and the MGA-TVO), but only gets enumerated as a single device - hence some of the multimonitor problems under Win2K.

(It will be interesting to see how the G450DH and MX-TwinView work under Win2K...)

[Nuno]

Darin, every now and then we got carried away, after all we´re MURCers!

I think the main point is, and everyone should agree: ATI Radeon is very promising, it´s actually the only contender against the GF2. But ATI has failed to deliever proper drivers to make their hardware excel. Matrox has done it to (to a certain extent).
What I think is that you should wait a couple of weeks (maybe more, with the forementioned delays) and look for reviews with RTM drivers, and most important, ATI newsgroups. Then your could see if ATI is really delievering or if it was only the good old fashined hype.

[Darin]

Nuno,
I too am uncertain about their driver support. I generally don't like to support companies that have shown a history of not supporting their customers, but at the same time I don't want to cut off my nose to spite my face. The reason I went ahead & ordered one is because I'm gettting one through the ECS rebate deal, which when combined with ATI's rebate, gets the cost around $180. I just don't think you can beat that for a current generation card with the Radeon AIW capabilities. If it sux, I can always send it back, but today was the last day for the ECS rebate.

It will either be an incredible deal, or I won't like it & it will go back (or I'll cancel it before it gets here). Hopefully it will be the former!

[Storm]

I usually just read and laugh at these kinds of debates, but in this case I'll have to comment. You people have a distinct impression that ATI's drivers suck.. now, that is indeed true. But you see, as "Matrox fans" you can only say that if Matrox's drivers did Not suck. However, that's Not true. May I remind you of the numerous problems with DualHead, OpenGL and D3D that Matrox is faced with? The last set of Win2k drivers are betas. Problems in professional applications (which seems to be Matrox's emphasis) weren't fixed for a Long Time, and a lot still remain. Aside from all that, the G400 and even the G450 are several generations behind. Having said that, I still have a lot of faith in Matrox and I certainly will buy the G800 once it's released, though insulting ATI isn't something I'd be doing.
=Storm=


------------------
P60-120Thz, 256Tb ram, 27.5Pb 225000 RPM HD, 142" .001 dot pitch monitor @ 30720x23040x64, Matrox G24000 w/512Gb, SB UltraLive2, DX120 beta, Win2112 SP4. Hey -- beta testers have their advantages...

[Livius]

ATI drivers suck in a different way than Matrox drivers. I have no prejudices against ATI (or any other manufacturer, for that matter), except those derived from my own experience. I've always had huge problems with ATI, whether it was the Rage Pro, 128 or MAXX. (The latter is, btw, the greatest swindle I've seen - nice benchmark numbers but crappy gameplay across the board).

My distinct feeling is that unlike Matrox, who have almost put their act together, ATI are still far behind. Anyone who has recently used a MAXX can tell you that. Their driver support is still miserable. And it's not only that their drivers are crappy. They do not even fully support them. ATI's latest innovation was the "special drivers" - new drivers which ATI does not include in their support program (usually the non-special, fully supported ones are many months old).

My suggestion is this: do not touch an ATI product until it has been comprehensively tested (that's usually 6 months after it becomes widely available). All you see on the net are Quake/UT-reviews. Wait until someone has tried 5 dozen games on the card and then decide whether to buy it or not.

I give it to you that nVidia does not have the best 2D in the world (are you using a 21", by the way?). But they have great drivers and this more than makes it up for it. You might also try to get a better nVidia board - ELSA are reputed for making the best 2D of an nVidia chip.

[isochar]

Well, I have a g400max and a annihilator 2. They look nearly identical at 1024x768, but the difference does appear at 1280x1024. (So if you have a 19" or higher you might be disappointed)

As for elsa, yes, they have been rumored to have the best 2d of all the nvidia cards. However, their gladiac (gf2) is manufactured by VisionTek, so stay away from it and get a Annihilator 2 or Prophet 2.

[Humus]

I'm probably gonna go for the Radeon too. It's gonna be a perfect platform for my development.
Anyway, those driver issues with previous cards hasn't showed up at all with the Radeon. The only problem so far I've heard was a single guy having problems running 3dmarks2000, and I've read hundreds of reviews and forum post about it.
The reason many previous ATi card have nad issues is because they were geared towards OEM, where complete support for everything wasn't such a big deal. In short, they didn't need to have complete drivers.

[paulcs]

The driver problems that have shown up with older ATI boards have indeed shown up with the Radeon. The Radeon's drivers are based upon the much maligned Rage 128 drivers. I've tested a lot of hardware over the last couple of years, and nothing gave me more problems than the Fury (unless it was broken). It was just awful. I think ATI should have ditched their old drivers and started from scratch. Some things just can't be fixed.

ATI was one of the most profitable companies in the computer industry, and they've reported losses recently. Clearly, their problems have eroded their OEM base. Even Apple is pissed off at them. The new PowerMac G4's were suppose to ship with the Radeon, but it looks like Apple decided to go with the ATI Rage 128 Pro.

http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics.html
http://www.apple.com/powermaccube/graphics.html


Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 01 September 2000).]

[paulcs]

Gigatexel? With an overclocked Fury? They must be high! You guys have to see this:

http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics.html

Of course, who am I to judge a super-computer?

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 01 September 2000).]