Not a joke, G450 slower than software mode

[Dogbert]

3DStudioMax benchmarks showed G450 slower than softrware mode.
See it for yourself, check the last garph on the last page.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/video/3dmax/


------------------
I like to con people, but I also like to insult them. What if I could combine the two, I would call it - Consult !

[Randy Simons]

Then use software mode. Or buy a professional 3D card.

The G450 wasn't meant to use for games, let alone for use with high-end 3D graphics apps...

[Maggi]

not really surprising, is it ?

[Joel]

But also look at some of the other graphs where the G450 was faster than software and also look at the ones where software was faster than all of them, even the GeFart2s. It's just like you to judge a card based on one graph rather than looking at the whole picture.

Joel

[kewlcat]

Omigod G450 is faster than Radeon in most tests!!!



-Rahul

------------------
Abit KT7, Duron 700@900, G400 32MB DualHead, 256MB RAM, 2xMaxtor 20 GB, SBLive! Value.
Running RedHat 7.1 and Windows 2000 Professional.

[EvilDonnyboy]

I don't think Matrox works much on their NT drivers. The guy who wrote that says NT OpenGL drivers are more complete and mature. Well judging from the amount of times Matrox updates their NT drivers, I disagree. I would expect Matrox's win2k drivers to be more complete, and therefore would compete better with the big guys. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Liquid Snake]

Well, remember that now, the OpenGL ICDs are interchangeable. So the ICD in the latest NT driver is going to be the same one as the Win2K driver

[Maggi]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Liquid Snake:
Well, remember that now, the OpenGL ICDs are interchangeable. So the ICD in the latest NT driver is going to be the same one as the Win2K driver </font>

but only when they get released on the same day ...

no, seriously now, EvilDonnyboy

if you encounter a specific problem using OpenGL under NT, just replace the G400icd.dll with one of the newer releases of either W98 or Win2k.
There is a good chance that one or the other problems got fixed in a more recent ICD.

Cheers,
Maggi

[EvilDonnyboy]

I'm not having any trouble with NT drivers. I don't use NT.

I'm just saying that the guy who wrote the Xbit labs article may have mis-represented Matrox by using a crappy openGL ICD. I would tell him to use a more updated ICD for the next round-up, but it's not like he'd listen to me.

He's not even using the latest NT drivers. The 4.77 NT drivers came out in March. And he's still using the 4.73 drivers.

[This message has been edited by EvilDonnyboy (edited 07 May 2001).]

[rugger]

EvilDonnyBoy

I don't think a minor driver revision is going to affect the final score much. The G450 card is no FireGL 2 card, and matrox have already outlined their policy on not providing optimiszed opengl support.

The G450 actually does very well until it needed to do anti-aliased lines, which is probably a hardware defeciency.

[G200 PSYCHOMAN]

OWW!!!
'SuperDuperVision' makes the worlds first 23" LCD monitor - This means it MUST be BETTER than 'Sony's' crappy 21" LCD monitors!!!

Sony is like SOOOO CRAAAP!!!


(not!)

[Dogbert]

Well, if software is so strong, (as proven by so many graphs) why can't Matrox tweak their drivers to use more CPU power for the things the CPU is better at anyway ? You don't pay >100$ for a video card that actually slows your system down.

When I bought my good old mill 1, I learned that CPU + Graphic card > CPU alone.
Once this equation doesn't work, something must be awfully wrong.

------------------
I like to con people, but I also like to insult them. What if I could combine the two, I would call it - Consult !

[G200 PSYCHOMAN]

Maybe rugger's right - maybe the hardware is being forced to do something it is not really optimised to be capable of it(?).

Dogbert, im sure that this isn't the case for EVERYTHING else the card can do!!! Just a minor 'deficiency'!

[az]

The G450 is NOT intended for use with 3DSMAX, and Matrox officially state that OpenGL is NOT their primary concern - you shouldn't be complaining. All the G450 is about is clear and crisp 2D and DualHead, and I guess it's quite good at it.

AZ

[Gurm]

Matrox is first and foremost concerned with 2D. Even the spiffy features of the G400 (EMBM, for example) are simply "added value" features for them.

The G450, for example, is a step forward in 2D (better DAC, I think) but backwards in 3D (slower 3D due to bad memory architecture). But Matrox don't care.

As for professional GL work - NOBODY's card is really well optimized for that. Some cards accelerate more functions than others, but designing a card to do GL work is TOTALLY different from designing one to play games.

Look at the Permedia2 and 3. Both will wipe the walls with ANY game card (including the GeFart3) in 3DS Max or Maya or really ANY 3D application. Yet their gaming speed and features are piss poor.

It's just a totally different card design. Matrox decided that since they were not making a professional 3D card, that they would not bother optimizing those functions AT ALL. nVidia, in their typical crackhead haphazard way, accelerated and optimized a few of those functions. Poorly.

Matrox has quiet specifically chosen their path, and the fact that it isn't the path you'd like it to be is moot.

Another point... if you can afford 3DSMax, you can afford a couple extra grand for a professional GL card. I don't know why these sites BOTHER doing these professional level tests on consumer level cards.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[This message has been edited by Gurm (edited 08 May 2001).]