Matrox, Quadro or Wildcat for 2.5D guy

[Virgulino]

I'm (was?) a long time Matrox admirer, and in the next few months I will setup a new machine for may day-to-day use, and retire my G200.

I hope someone can give me advice to which card best fulfills my needs.

I use the machine to develop software, so, 75% of the time the machine will be running Visual Studio. I'm not "into" games, and I think the only time I'm not running solely good old GDI and jumping into DirectSomethingLand is when use some media player.

I have 9 *absolute* requirements for the new graphic card:

1. Rock solid drivers
2. Drivers with reliability very close to those ATI Rage XL embedded in server motherboards
3. Drivers that let me have a uptime of 30 days, minimum
4. Driver is a piece of software that runs in the kernel, at ring 0 - I should not have *anything* else running (that shows in the task manager) when I'm working
5. The first thing I do every morning should not be browsing the manufacturer's site looking if a new driver was released
6. No less than Matrox-grade video quality on CRTs
7. Fast as the light speed 2D GDI performance
8. Dual independend heads
9. Did I mention ROCK SOLID drivers?

On the plus side, it would be nice to have solid DirectX and OpenGL support, to develop some simple 3D software just to learn, and just study some professional 3D applications.

I think the Matrox P650 might be a very good solution for me, and in the right price range. BUT i can't stop thinking in alternatives like nVidia Quadro 380XGL and Wildcat VP560.

Is there anyone who can tell me something about these two cards? Their stability, video quality, and performance, compared to the p650?

Thank's a lot!

PS: Sorry about my weak english.

[TdB]

I have a parhelia in my computer and I would guess that the P650 works the same way(they share the same drivers). I think the P650 can handle your requirements, the drivers seems very stable and solid, However I usually turn my computer off at night, so someone else will have to tell you about possible uptime issues.

The powerdesk-software do show up in my taskmanager, but it can be disabled. Doing that will remove access to some settings like anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering (I don´t know if this will disable dualhead though).

I don´t know how fast the p650 is with 2d performance though...


the stabillity of the drivers was actually my reason for buying this card in the first place, and sofar i haven´t been dissapointed...

the "3d"potion of the drivers isn´t THAT much upto date, It only has direct3d 8.1/opengl1.3 functionallity supported in the drivers even though the chip is capable of more.... Plus, the P650 is a bit slow in 3d.

[Ribbit]

If you must have Matrox-grade analog output quality, then I still don't think you've got any other choice than Matrox.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

CRTs... no less than Matrox quality... hmm... Matrox is the only way to go...

Forget about Wildcats, I don't think they are for 2D...

BUT

ATI is also pretty good... Why not consider an ATI FireGL? ATI (make sure its built-by-ati) boards have great 2D quality (close to Matrox, at least for their gaming boards, so i'd think their pro line is even better).

In terms of drivers, NVIDIA has the best drivers IMO for workstation, both DX and FireGL. I don't know if you do any DX9 3d programming... if you need 3D 128bit FP precision only nvidia offers that. ATI offers 96bit FP precision... NVIDIA also has the fastest performance in workstation 3D graphics, unlike gaming.

but of course, nvidia cards, at least their gaming cards, have POOR image quality. You'd have to check with others about Quadro's CRT analog quality...

but i think ATI has better overlay speed (GDI+)

lol...

So to sum up... there is no perfect card. but i can draw some conclusions...

Matrox:
Best 2D analog output quality.
3 monitor stretched desktops possible
Board level is not DX9, but i don't think you care.
Drivers are built on .NET, not so good IMO, and not so mature drivers
Slow 3D
Fast overlay, and GDI+ implementation. At least on the older G550.

ATI
Best balance between 2D and 3D.
Good, very very satifing 2D analog quality. (Not very noticeable from Matrox)
DX9 support.
Fast GDI+ speed.
Pretty solid drivers, but not as good as nvidia.
Pretty good workstation 3D speed, not as good as nvidia.
only 96bit 3D color precision.

NVIDIA Quadro line
Fast 3D worksation raw power.
128bit 3D color precision.
Best drivers, both OGL 1.5 (i think they also have 2.0 when i read quadro's whitepaper) and DX9.
DX9 support.
Slower GDI implemenation than others (at least for consumer boards, you'd have to check)
Poor analog quality (at least for consumer boards)
***This is my experience with NVIDIA gaming boards, so it maybe very different for their PRO line, I'd think they use higher grade electronics components on the PRO line... and GDI maybe a lot faster on workstation series***

[spadnos]

I'm a developer, who is into games .

I have a Parhelia OEM and 3 19-inch monitors. I have only shut down my machine to change hardware, or to move it around.
I haven't had any driver stability problems - this is with as many as 30 LabView windows open, two OpenOffice spreadsheets, EMail, TakeCommand command prompt, IAR Embedded Workbench, and Atmel AVR Studio running (oh, and WinAmp in Always On Top mode), and then switching into and out of DirectX mode (single monitor) for playing Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory.

The only issue I have seen is in LabView - sometimes tooltips leave black bars on controls when they go away. I'm pretty sure this is a LabView thing, although I don't remember it happening with my G450.

Hope this helps.

- Steve

[Nicram]

I used Parhelia for about 2 years. & I'm back too G400
Drivers of Parhelia are builded on .NET & sometimes they are unstable couse of this platform (.NET sucks :P).
Uptime with Parhelia Drivers on my PC was about 30-40 days. Parhelia is fast in 2D, when GigaColor is off. When it's on there are sometimes problems with colors of accelerated elements (cursos etc.). When I back too G400 I see little worse 2D quality (just little) & slow down in 3D. But system run much faster (slower driver initialisation time when system is starting + no .NET needed so about 20-40MB more freee RAM at start), & system is working more stable.
Choose G400MAX !

[TransformX]

Seems like the P650 / P750 are good choice price wise.

For the stronger 3D cards, I think my bet would be on the FireGL.

[Ali]

Originally posted by spadnos
cut...
, and Atmel AVR Studio running

Another AVRFreak eh?

If you do use anything like AVR studio, you NEED more than one monitor. There is no way to use that otherwise. Helps to have 3 if you want the datasheet pdf open for reference to you uProcessor of choice too.

Anyway, on to origonal poster.

Ive got development experiance with both ATI and Matrox, and when I was at school with Quadros (but only single monitor).

I use a ATI9700Pro at home, with 2 20inch screens, and the stability is great. I think the uptime is around 80 days or so, and I only shut down to move things around.

At work, I have a Matrox G450 PCI and a G400 AGP, running 3 15 inch monitors. This has an uptime of 112 days at the moment, so the drivers are VERY stable, although I do seem to loos a few minutes on the clock every couple of days, that 'might' be driver related.

The quadros I used at school had good 2D quality with the monitors they had (21 inch sonys I think). The computers themselves were VERY unstable, but it probably wasnt the video in that case.

My father in law has a P650 with two 22inch monitors, and Ive used that for a little bit of playing with photoshop, and VBA stuff for him, and it seemed slower than my work machine. This computer has been on non stop since we built it though ( ~ 5 months I guess).

If I was building another dev machine now, I would probably buy two G550s, one PCI, one AGP, and use three monitors (desk space becomes an issue after that). Probably cost around the same as a P750 anyway.

Ali

[Virgulino]

Originally posted by TdB
The powerdesk-software do show up in my taskmanager, but it can be disabled. Doing that will remove access to some settings like anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering (I don´t know if this will disable dualhead though).

As long as I only have to run this application to change some setting that's perfectly fine to me.

the stabillity of the drivers was actually my reason for buying this card in the first place, and sofar i haven´t been dissapointed...

Thanks for the information. Driver stability is my main concern with any kind of hardware...

the "3d"potion of the drivers isn´t THAT much upto date, It only has direct3d 8.1/opengl1.3 functionallity supported in the drivers even though the chip is capable of more.... Plus, the P650 is a bit slow in 3d.

That's ok to me. I just want a correct ("by the book") implementation of these APIs to learn them.

TdB, thanks for your help!

[Virgulino]

Originally posted by Ribbit
If you must have Matrox-grade analog output quality, then I still don't think you've got any other choice than Matrox.

Related to any other consumer card, I think that's true. But I always wanted to hear a first-hand comparison with some "professional" card.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

oh ya, forgot to mention that i soft-modded my GeForce FX 5200 into a Quadro FX 500

[Virgulino]

Originally posted by Chrono_Wanderer
Forget about Wildcats, I don't think they are for 2D...

Their VP ASIC (ops, GPU, ops, VPU!) have a very unique and sexy design. I would really like to see more information on their 2D capabilities and video quality.

ATI is also pretty good... Why not consider an ATI FireGL? ATI (make sure its built-by-ati) boards have great 2D quality (close to Matrox, at least for their gaming boards, so i'd think their pro line is even better).

Their cheapest card is US$349 (list price), and I woul'd like to stay in the P650 price range. (My country's currency is undervaluated against the dolar, and I have to pay a 60% tax to import any hardware... )
So I would really like some first-hand comparison against Matrox before I spend my money.

In terms of drivers, NVIDIA has the best drivers IMO for workstation, both DX and FireGL. I don't know if you do any DX9 3d programming... if you need 3D 128bit FP precision only nvidia offers that. ATI offers 96bit FP precision... NVIDIA also has the fastest performance in workstation 3D graphics, unlike gaming.

but of course, nvidia cards, at least their gaming cards, have POOR image quality. You'd have to check with others about Quadro's CRT analog quality...

I've read many times about the good quality of their drivers related to speed and correct rendering, but I can't remember one time reading about stability. Same thing for the analog quality...
Besides, this unified driver (consumer and pro unified) and version 99.666 thing scares me!

Matrox:
Board level is not DX9, but i don't think you care.

It's a minor concern, for one thing: Windows Longhorn. It's still too far away, but as soon as the first oficial beta/release candidat is out, I'll have to have a serious look at it.
If a Quadro 380XGL have the same other qualities as a P650, that can make it the best choice.

ATI
Pretty solid drivers, but not as good as nvidia.

Here what scares me is that I remember a very short time ago they where talking about shifting the driver development focus towards stability, because their (consumer) clients where complaining really bad!!!

Thanks for your help, Chrono_Wanderer.

[Virgulino]

Originally posted by spadnos
I'm a developer, who is into games .

I don't do games anymore (since the 8-bits/Elite era): I can't stop!

(...) I have only shut down my machine to change hardware, or to move it around. I haven't had any driver stability problems (...)

Hope this helps.

- Steve

Steve, this helps *a lot*, it's the type of information I'm looking for.

Thank you very much!

[Virgulino]

Originally posted by Nicram
I used Parhelia for about 2 years. & I'm back too G400
Drivers of Parhelia are builded on .NET & sometimes they are unstable couse of this platform (.NET sucks :P).

Technicaly speaking, it's the "control/configurator" application that's .NETed, not the driver. What kind of instability did you experience? Crashes/frozens/gremilings in the operating system as a whole, or just with the control/configurator application?

Uptime with Parhelia Drivers on my PC was about 30-40 days. Parhelia is fast in 2D, when GigaColor is off. When it's on there are sometimes problems with colors of accelerated elements (cursos etc.). When I back too G400 I see little worse 2D quality (just little) & slow down in 3D. But system run much faster (slower driver initialisation time when system is starting + no .NET needed so about 20-40MB more freee RAM at start), & system is working more stable.
Choose G400MAX !

Thanks for the information, Nicram!

PS: Just in case, I will keep my G200 at hand!

[Virgulino]

Originally posted by TransformX
Seems like the P650 / P750 are good choice price wise.

For the stronger 3D cards, I think my bet would be on the FireGL.

Since I didn't find any specific information about the others, Matrox seems to be the choice.

About stronger 3D, I really don't need much more performance than P650, BUT DirectX9 would be a nice and useful plus to me.