Tweet
Here are the results of a side-by-side comparison of the Matrox Marvel G400-TV and the Matrox Millennium G550 graphics cards. I am mostly interested in the quality of the TV-out signal. I am not interested in games or 3D graphics. The normal Windows desktop on my computer monitor looks very clear and stable with both cards (I use 1600x1200 85Hz large fonts when I am sitting at the computer).
For about 2 years I have been using a Matrox Marvel G400-TV card and the picture on my TV using the S-Video output is excellent. I use TV-out for playback of interlaced MPEG2 files of music performances captured from TV broadcasts (mostly from digital transmissions, both widescreen and 4:3, analogue capture by G400-TV, mpeg coding by TMPGEnc). I use Dual Head Clone with a desktop of 800x600 to choose a track in Windows Explorer, I double click on the track, it starts to play in the Windows Media Player then DVDMax switches in to display the video full-screen - I really enjoy this system.
I recently built a new PC to take over the audio/visual playback part of the system and I bought a Matrox Millennium G550 (full retail version) for it. I chose a G550 because people on this and other forums have said that Matrox cards are still the best for TV-out. For example Mike T said:
>I have an ATI AIW 8500DV, an Nvidia Ti4200 and
>Matrox G450. I have measured the TV out on all
>of them with TV test signals and professional TV
>monitoring equipment. The TV out quality and
>resolution of the G450 is by FARRR better than
>anything else. The Ti4200 is OK, but the video
>output at 5 MHz is down about 60%. The ATI
>has artefacts and the video is down about 80%
>at 5 MHz.
I installed the Ravisent DVD software which came with each card. Double clicking a track in Windows Explorer uses the Ravisent codec to play the track through Windows Media Player. Using this method the G550 produces a very much poorer TV-out picture than the G400 - less sharp and movement is smeared. The G550 is clearly de-interlacing the picture for both the computer monitor and the TV-out. The G400 retains the interlacing so the pictures look much better on the TV (but worse on the computer screen). Two points which are better on the G550:
1. The seek bar in the Media player does not work with the G400 but it does work with the G550 (because of DVDMax you can only use this bar from the computer screen).
2. Video on the computer screen automatically switches to the correct aspect ratio on the G550 but always displays 4:3 on the G400-TV. You have to switch the aspect ratio of the TV manually with both cards.
Both of these are features of the Ravisent software rather than the card hardware.
I posted a message to Matrox Tech Support forum asking how to get interlaced TV-out pictures from the G550. They said it could not be done and, unfortunately, none of their current cards support interlacing on the secondary output. I now know that this is incorrect. Here is the thread:
As a result of the Tech Support thread, Saar e-mailed me and explained how to get interlacing working on the G550. He recommended PowerDVD, I downloaded a trial version from here:
The trick is to set Video | Advanced to 'Force Weave'. Apparently 'Weave' means 'Interlace' (you also have to have some DVDMax settings correct in the Matrox dialogues). So now I have interlaced pictures from the G550. Not only is it interlaced but the sharpness and general video quality from the G550 now looks identical on my TV to the pictures from the G400. It seems that de-interlacing not only smears movement but it produces slightly softer pictures generally.
WinDVD 4 also has a Force Weave setting but when you start the programme it reverts to 'Auto' so you have to set it every time. PowerDVD remembers the setting between sessions.
One area where the G400-TV is very much better than the G550 is display of the Windows desktop on the TV (Dual Head Clone). Letters in menus and Windows Explorer are badly formed on the G550. Like a bad ink jet printout some letters look bold or over-inked and some letters are thin with parts missing. The Dual Head clone on the G400-TV produces perfectly formed letters (but, of course, soft compared with a computer monitor). I use 800x600 large fonts when I am choosing tracks in front of the TV. With both cards this is about the limit of what I can read on my TV but the picture from the G400 is pleasant whereas the G550 desktop looks very crude.
I have not found a way with the G550 to just double click on a track in Windows Explorer and have it play with interlacing. You have to first launch PowerDVD then choose tracks through a playlist system. I prefer the simplicity of double-clicking in Explorer and I like the way Media Player ends with a freeze-frame of the last frame of the video (Ctrl-W returns me the desktop when I am ready). After playing a video track on the G550 when you return to the Windows desktop it has become over-scanned on the TV. A large part of the edges of the desktop are hidden on my TV (it was OK before playing a video).
I have only been using the G550 for a few days so there will be some things I have not discovered yet, but currently I am leaning towards using a G400-TV in my new playback PC.
For about 2 years I have been using a Matrox Marvel G400-TV card and the picture on my TV using the S-Video output is excellent. I use TV-out for playback of interlaced MPEG2 files of music performances captured from TV broadcasts (mostly from digital transmissions, both widescreen and 4:3, analogue capture by G400-TV, mpeg coding by TMPGEnc). I use Dual Head Clone with a desktop of 800x600 to choose a track in Windows Explorer, I double click on the track, it starts to play in the Windows Media Player then DVDMax switches in to display the video full-screen - I really enjoy this system.
I recently built a new PC to take over the audio/visual playback part of the system and I bought a Matrox Millennium G550 (full retail version) for it. I chose a G550 because people on this and other forums have said that Matrox cards are still the best for TV-out. For example Mike T said:
>I have an ATI AIW 8500DV, an Nvidia Ti4200 and
>Matrox G450. I have measured the TV out on all
>of them with TV test signals and professional TV
>monitoring equipment. The TV out quality and
>resolution of the G450 is by FARRR better than
>anything else. The Ti4200 is OK, but the video
>output at 5 MHz is down about 60%. The ATI
>has artefacts and the video is down about 80%
>at 5 MHz.
I installed the Ravisent DVD software which came with each card. Double clicking a track in Windows Explorer uses the Ravisent codec to play the track through Windows Media Player. Using this method the G550 produces a very much poorer TV-out picture than the G400 - less sharp and movement is smeared. The G550 is clearly de-interlacing the picture for both the computer monitor and the TV-out. The G400 retains the interlacing so the pictures look much better on the TV (but worse on the computer screen). Two points which are better on the G550:
1. The seek bar in the Media player does not work with the G400 but it does work with the G550 (because of DVDMax you can only use this bar from the computer screen).
2. Video on the computer screen automatically switches to the correct aspect ratio on the G550 but always displays 4:3 on the G400-TV. You have to switch the aspect ratio of the TV manually with both cards.
Both of these are features of the Ravisent software rather than the card hardware.
I posted a message to Matrox Tech Support forum asking how to get interlaced TV-out pictures from the G550. They said it could not be done and, unfortunately, none of their current cards support interlacing on the secondary output. I now know that this is incorrect. Here is the thread:
As a result of the Tech Support thread, Saar e-mailed me and explained how to get interlacing working on the G550. He recommended PowerDVD, I downloaded a trial version from here:
The trick is to set Video | Advanced to 'Force Weave'. Apparently 'Weave' means 'Interlace' (you also have to have some DVDMax settings correct in the Matrox dialogues). So now I have interlaced pictures from the G550. Not only is it interlaced but the sharpness and general video quality from the G550 now looks identical on my TV to the pictures from the G400. It seems that de-interlacing not only smears movement but it produces slightly softer pictures generally.
WinDVD 4 also has a Force Weave setting but when you start the programme it reverts to 'Auto' so you have to set it every time. PowerDVD remembers the setting between sessions.
One area where the G400-TV is very much better than the G550 is display of the Windows desktop on the TV (Dual Head Clone). Letters in menus and Windows Explorer are badly formed on the G550. Like a bad ink jet printout some letters look bold or over-inked and some letters are thin with parts missing. The Dual Head clone on the G400-TV produces perfectly formed letters (but, of course, soft compared with a computer monitor). I use 800x600 large fonts when I am choosing tracks in front of the TV. With both cards this is about the limit of what I can read on my TV but the picture from the G400 is pleasant whereas the G550 desktop looks very crude.
I have not found a way with the G550 to just double click on a track in Windows Explorer and have it play with interlacing. You have to first launch PowerDVD then choose tracks through a playlist system. I prefer the simplicity of double-clicking in Explorer and I like the way Media Player ends with a freeze-frame of the last frame of the video (Ctrl-W returns me the desktop when I am ready). After playing a video track on the G550 when you return to the Windows desktop it has become over-scanned on the TV. A large part of the edges of the desktop are hidden on my TV (it was OK before playing a video).
I have only been using the G550 for a few days so there will be some things I have not discovered yet, but currently I am leaning towards using a G400-TV in my new playback PC.