What do you guys think about the G550 review at Ace's??

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by Galvin
I finally did the unthinkable, after being with matrox cards for 5 years or so I got my self an geforce3 card last week and this card's 2D is plenty good for me.

G400 just doesn't cut it anymore for modern games.
I'm happy with my decision.

What new games, Galvin??

I play or have played UT, Q3A, Black & White, Nascar 4, Rogue Spear, Age of Kings: Conquerors, Cossacks, and Tribes 2 with my G400.

Everything has been perfectly playable and looked sweet.

amish

[Greebe]

Oh I am so sure it is Galvin, especially when running an awesome resolution of 1024x768 on a 21" monitor!

Bwahahahahaha

[Galvin]

Originally posted by Electric Amish


What new games, Galvin??

I play or have played UT, Q3A, Black & White, Nascar 4, Rogue Spear, Age of Kings: Conquerors, Cossacks, and Tribes 2 with my G400.

Everything has been perfectly playable and looked sweet.

amish

I play black and white at 1024x768 with everything turned on, the G400 would suffer too much with those settings. That's the only new game I bought this year other than diablo II LOD. but I can play quake3 at 1024x768x32 with evrything at max settings with no chuggyness. It rocks, also I no longer get graphic glitches in quake3 like I did with the G400. The 2D is excellent for a 3D card. You guys can say 2D is better etc etc, I don't care :P

[DukeP]

Fanatism beget blindness....

The G400MAX isnt dead. Its quite good at playing games released 2-3 years ago.

Modern games tho. Max Payne. Anarchy online. Return to wolfenstein. Tribes 2.

For those games, the old MAX doesnt cut it anymore.. I have always used 19" monitors. I DONT want to play any games at less than 1024x768. I prefer to play at 1280x1024 (my standard res).

Yes, I miss the crispness of the Max. Its something to do with the colours. Porb need a real good monitor to really tell the difference. I have a really good monitor.

So. G550 => Oem business. Go with grace.

Im waiting for the promised solution for gamers. I need Geoforce 2 gts or ultra speed. I need clear highres pictures and "vibrant" colours. I need support for Directx 9 (yes, I tend to keep my Matrox cards for years. I wont settle for DX8).

Am I dissappointed about this review?
No. As expected, or actually even better.

Lets get on with it then.. Anybody know anything about the nextMatrox card? Lets meet up in the Crystal ball all.. =)

[omegaRED]

Allright ...

Why, oh why do we always get into this "When will M release a gaming card", "The G400 doesnt cut it with modern Games", "It`s crap", "Who needs HeadCasting" etc.

People, Matrox has a target audience. If they`re making profit, good for them. For me, my Vanilla G400 is good enough. I mostly work with 2D programs, i play games every day (UT & Q3A, Supreme Snowboarding) and it suits me fine. If Matrox releases a card capable of displaying UT in 1280x1024x32 everything on max faster than my Vanilla does 960x720x16, i`ll buy it. If they dont, i wont buy another card, atleast not until i feel i NEED a faster card. Right now i dont need it.

If anyone here isn`t satisfied with MAXs speed, go buy a KyroII or a GeForce2 Pro. Its that simple.

You are allowed to own other cards people. You dont have to stick with Matrox.

I dont consider anyone who bought another card a traitor. They have needs, they satisfy their needs.I am satisfied with my G400.

But please stop this "The GF3 beats the crap out of G550 in 3D". We know that, thank you for sharing that with us. Why do so many on the fori feel that Matrox must satisfy their needs? Matrox said their goal is 2D. Thats it. Move on people. Dont be angry on Matrox because they didnt release a gaming card, go buy a Radeon, and dont bitch about it.

[leech]

I indeed might buy a Radeon, but then I thought about it today, and realized that My Marvel G400 pretty much plays everything I'm interested in (yes indeed I even beat Max Payne with it) And Frankly I use 2D a hell of a lot more than 3D, so I'll stick with my Marvel until Matrox makes a faster 3D card, because I can't stand the 2D on the Nvidia crap. Besides being a big user of Linux, I'll always know that Matrox supports it well. Game on, people and have fun.

Leech

[omegaRED]

That was my point. If you cant stand playing UT on 1024x768 with ~42fps, and playing with a higher fps really means the world to you, buy a gaming card. You wont see me calling you an idiot or a triator because you bought a GeForce. To me, it isnt crucial. It`d be nice to have a Matrox card doing that, but it isnt crucial. I`d rather play UT on medium detal and 960x720 than running my 24" monitor on a GeForce, plus i dont have $350 to spend on a GF3, which has, supposedly, a very good 2D output.

I cant afford an expensive card now (i can say for sure i`ll never pay $350 for a video card), and frankly, i`m quite satisfied with my G400.

[omegaRED]

And Galvin, i`m really happy you found the card of your dreams. Hope it serves you well. (no, this isnt sarcasm, i mean it ... ) Just please stop bragging about its superior 3D speed and Matrox-level 2D output ... its childish. People might get the feeling you think theyre stupid because they still have their G400/MAX/G450, and dont have a GF3 or KyroII.

[Galvin]

Originally posted by omegaRED
And Galvin, i`m really happy you found the card of your dreams. Hope it serves you well. (no, this isnt sarcasm, i mean it ... ) Just please stop bragging about its superior 3D speed and Matrox-level 2D output ... its childish. People might get the feeling you think theyre stupid because they still have their G400/MAX/G450, and dont have a GF3 or KyroII.

I haven't been bragging, people asked me some questions about some things I answered, but I never said the GF3 beats the crap out of G400, I think some others may have said that though.

[The Viking]

How is the 2d @ 1280x1024 (honestly!)

You bought a GF3, which card did you buy? I am considering an ASUS geforce 3 but I am afraid that the 2d Is poor. How is the 2d @ 1280x1024 (honestly!)

Originally posted by Galvin
I finally did the unthinkable, after being with matrox cards for 5 years or so I got my self an geforce3 card last week and this card's 2D is plenty good for me.

G400 just doesn't cut it anymore for modern games.
I'm happy with my decision.

[DosFreak]

2d's fine at 1280X1024 @85hz with my Geforce 3 on my Sony E500. Would take a pic if I could with a cam...to bad I don't have one.

and as for bragging....I used to get 65-70fps in 1920X1440 in UT but since I replace my Live! with a Herc XP I only get 50something.

[The Viking]

I have a Sony f-500 so maybe it will be nice on my monitor too

Is it just as good as a G-xxx card or less that a matrox card but not THAT much, in 2D?

Originally posted by DosFreak
2d's fine at 1280X1024 @85hz with my Geforce 3 on my Sony E500. Would take a pic if I could with a cam...to bad I don't have one.

and as for bragging....I used to get 65-70fps in 1920X1440 in UT but since I replace my Live! with a Herc XP I only get 50something.

[The Viking]

Post 14

could not have a post nr.13 (B-A-D)

[Galvin]

Re: How is the 2d @ 1280x1024 (honestly!)

Originally posted by The Viking
You bought a GF3, which card did you buy? I am considering an ASUS geforce 3 but I am afraid that the 2d Is poor. How is the 2d @ 1280x1024 (honestly!)

Which is why I went with a gainward which has much better 2D. Speaking about bragging, don't you get sick of all the G400 users bragging about how great the 2D is, that's no worse than saying how great the 3D is on other cards.

But that statement is hardly bragging, that was taken back when I was thinking of which card to go with. So I asked around on here and other boards as well on other websites.

[K6-III]

The best 2D is on the Canopus and Gainward Geforce3's.