This is not the power of Matrox

[Tempest]

What about the Appian Hurricane? Is that a serious contender, or just another Radeon based board? I'm just asking, 'cause it's suggested retail price is only $169 and they've even got a PCI version coming...

[This message has been edited by Tempest (edited 01 May 2001).]

[TheDarkHorizon]

Too bad you pulled those specs out of your rear. You can't predict what Matrox will have to offer in the future. Use facts, not information from your little imaginary world.

[Rob M.]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Joel:
Based on that statement I can tell that you know nothing about the PC industry. OEMs have busines customers that buy PCs by the thousands where a hardcore gamer only buys one video card.
</font>

Say it ten more times and maybe I'll believe you too.

Back in the real world, OEMs sell what customers want. If Matrox fell behind 3 years ago, and the G100 was currently their best offering, what do you think an OEM would pick, a G100, a rage128 or a TNT?

Think I'm no one who doesn't know anything? Fine. Let Dell answer that for you: Even with the G200 and G4x0 in the market, Dell's Optiplex business line relies on the integrated Intel video with the option to upgrade to TNT2. (their high end comes automatically with tnt2)

Don't like Dell? Gateway's office line differs in only one way, the higher end computers use ATI R128 and Radeon VE cards.

Compaq? Again, Integrated and TNT2.

In fact, in my search, only in the Dell workstation class could I find a Matrox product.
Here it is, as it's listed under video:

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Professional Graphics : 3DLabs® Wildcat™II 5110 (128MB SDRAM)
ATI® Fire GL2 (64MB DDR)

Performance Graphics : nVIDIA® Quadro2 Pro (64MB)

Mainstream Graphics : nVIDIA® GeForce2 GTS® (32MB DDR)

Value Graphics : nVIDIA® TNT2 Pro (16MB)

Multi-Monitor Graphics : Matrox® G450 (32MB) (dual monitor capable)
</font>

Now before you get excited about this huge marketshare Matrox must be getting being in this lineup, these are Dual-1ghz cpus or P4 systems that you're ordering with it. I can't believe businesses bought 55 million workstation pc's last year.

In fact, I'd go out on a limb and say that there's more gamers buying cards then there are business users looking to match these systems with a G450.

What it all boils down to is that Matrox is just trying to put a positive spin on a bad situation. They've messed up. Their card is late and its performance is underwhelming. What are they going to tell the press? It's certainly not "We missed the boat this year"...

[WaR-ped]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Rob M.:
What it all boils down to is that Matrox is just trying to put a positive spin on a bad situation. They've messed up. Their card is late and its performance is underwhelming. What are they going to tell the press? It's certainly not "We missed the boat this year"...</font>

damn straight.


TheDarkHorizon, no shit I pulled those specs out of my ass. Basically I took what the situation that was about when the G400 came out and theorized what will happen. I suppose I was a bit too optimistic for Matrox though. Besides, dont tell me you honestly believe that Matrox is suddenly going to go ATI on us and pull a radeon out of their caboose.

Besides, the specs are a bit trivial dont you think? I was trying to put emphasis on the situation, not the specs. sheesh.

Also, as a Gateway employee, I know for a fact that we have no room for any matrox cards right now. Where would we put them? All the systems that are designed for business are equipped with onboard video and after dealing with tons of business clients for the past 8 months, I've noticed a trend. Cheapness sells. Business clients only want whats the most inexpensive. The few that want performance go all out, and at the present state, and what looks like the idealized performance level of the "g550" will not be something I will recommend to my clients simply because it will not get them the performance they crave. simple as that.

the only spot that could be filled might be for digital flat panel systems... oh wait, or 64mb Radeon VE recently took that spot. nevermind. and how much does that card cost? under 200 bucks huh? oh, and it gets pretty decent 2d quality? oh, it doesnt have good win2k drivers? thats alright I use windows 98 anyway. hmm... not bad...

[chucky2]

LOL!

Not that I'm a huge fan of Tom's, but check out the news post today (5-2-2000) about the IDSA.

Here the link: http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/index.html

I guess the gaming market isn't that "lucrative."

It's almost sad to see it come to this...

------------------
"All your profits are belong to us!" -AMD upon learning of Intel's 82% profit decline.
Tyan S1598C2
AMD K6-3+ 450 at 5x100
Matrox G400 DH 32MB SGRAM
Quantum Fireball Plus LM 15GB
Intel Pro/100+ Management
KDS AV-195TF

[Amiga Blitter]

Thanks to all who are contributing to create a comprensive comparative table to summarize the graphic cards market trying to foresee the trends. As far as my experience is concerned I wasted lot of money to buy various graphics cards (Mystique 220, M3d, G100, G200, G400 Max) now i would like to know where my sight should be directed. So the Matrox has the Power to continue innovating these segment market?

P.S.

In this year the gaming market will be greater than movies/cinematographics market. So building an Hardcore Gamers graphics card could be a very big affair.

[Joel]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">So building an Hardcore Gamers graphics card could be a very big affair.</font>

Who says they aren't working on one?

Joel

[WaR-ped]

I do. hehe.

[xortam]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by chucky2:
... check out the news post today (5-2-2000) about the IDSA.

Here the link: http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/index.html ...</font>

Interesting ... it states that gaming is a strong, growing market; $10.5 billion last year, grew at 14.9 percent. Matrox must be aware of this. I tend to agree that Matrox PR is trying to spin their position and they really did have some setbacks this last year. I hope they're over the worst of it any getting ready to compete again.
I've been busy upgrading the rest of my system and soon the weak link will only be the 3D accelerator. It would be nice if another Matrox card made it in there.

[Joel]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">I do. hehe.</font>

And we all know that you are full of it.

Joel

[Alec]

The G400 was, 3D-wise, a very competitive product. It´s easier (and wiser) for Matrox to continue on manufacturing new 3D cards, considering the investment already made and the money and prestige that can still be achieved, than to just give up.

It´s taking longer than we would expect, but Matrox have different products to work on, not only 3D cards. Microsoft, for example, will delay the release of Windows XP final until 2002 because of the X-BOX.

[jackzod]

It's fun to see that "moderator" are actually putting oil on the fire...

[Pace]

Whilst Matrox are probably making a load of money from OEM deals, it was announced recently that NVIDIA now have the largest share of the market, with over 50% I believe, and ATi second. If that's right, then Matrox are selling at least half of what NVIDIA are to OEMs. Maybe M's profitability is higher, but it's surprising to see NVIDIA have such high share anyway.

Their business model is fed by the rejects of their retail though, so once the GF3 is cheap crap (instead of expensive crap ), they can get rid if their stocks to OEMs.

And, while the G400 didn't get good press when it first came out, it was still very popular - even with the dodgy benchmarking done by certain sites While bringing out a GF3 killer might be nice, it'd better not cost as much as it. Hmm, while I think Matrox don't need to be told how to run their business off of me, it would appear that they will have hard times ahead if they don't stop this downward trend in OEM sales, and of course retail!

Paul.

PS: I don't know if their OEM sales have actually fallen, I'm just assuming this because NVIDIAs share has risen. In fact, the market might even be twice the size now, so their sales could've risen dramatically. I just thought I'd chuck in my worthless pennies above!

[DuRaNgO]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">The study found that products featuring NVIDIA graphics processing units (GPUs) held the largest market share in the workstation graphics segment with 34%.</font>

Actually, they "only" have 34%