Tweet
Right now I'm running a G400 MAX in the AGP slot and a Voodoo5 in the PCI slot. This gives the best image quality available today: the Matrox for crisp edges and vibrant colors, and the Voodoo5 for the FSAA. The Matrox has flat out the crispest, most vivid image and vibrant colors of anything out there. But this produces a lot of jaggies, shimmering, and the moire effect. When I get tired of that, I run the games on the Voodoo5 at 2X FSAA, which gives everything a silky sheen and texture to it.
I also have a Radeon 64 VIVO but I'm planning on selling it. It's been compared to a Matrox but no cigar - not as sharp and vibrant as the Matrox, in both 2D and 3D, plus it has tons of compatibility problems with older games (like anything before this year). It is also not much faster than a Geforce2 and has unusable FSAA.
Now with both the Matrox and Voodoo5, I have to play most the games at 16-bit to squeeze out frame rates, but fortunately both have 16-bit quality virtually indistinguishable from 32-bit (in 3D anyway). With both cards, 25-35 fps is very playable, unlike the Geforce cards.
Believe it or not, I also have a Geforce256 and Geforce2 Ultra, and I hardly use the cards because of the dull colors and soft image, and the FSAA is unusable. The gamma is also way too dark on games older than 2000-2001
As for the G400 MAX, long in the tooth, and the Voodoo5, bereft of driver support, not being able to handle newer games? Like what? Yeah, possibly Halo or Unreal2, but both play Giants, Sacrifice, Mercedes Benz Truck Racing, Superbike 2001, Alice, Undying, Insane, Deus Ex, and UT fine for me on my 800 Thunderbird. Even the Nascar4 demo runs at 40-45 fps with one car on the track, though I haven't played the game yet and I know it slows down a lot with more cars. The last set of 3dfx WHQL drivers are even more stable than anything Matrox has put out.
As for QuakeIII and Serious Sam, yeah, I have to turn the textures and details to medium to play well, but at least it's still at 1024x768. On all the old QuakeII-engine games, which I still haven't finished yet, both cards reign supreme with game compatibility and visuals.
I run multiple OSs, so I will be running both cards with Win98 SE well into the future. The only card I might opt for in the future is a G800 if it allows >70 fps at 1280x1024 and higher (so no need FSAA), or if Nvidia incorporates Rampage or 3dfx technology in a future card. The Geforce line of cards are crap and only good for getting a good 3DMark2001 score.
I also have a Radeon 64 VIVO but I'm planning on selling it. It's been compared to a Matrox but no cigar - not as sharp and vibrant as the Matrox, in both 2D and 3D, plus it has tons of compatibility problems with older games (like anything before this year). It is also not much faster than a Geforce2 and has unusable FSAA.
Now with both the Matrox and Voodoo5, I have to play most the games at 16-bit to squeeze out frame rates, but fortunately both have 16-bit quality virtually indistinguishable from 32-bit (in 3D anyway). With both cards, 25-35 fps is very playable, unlike the Geforce cards.
Believe it or not, I also have a Geforce256 and Geforce2 Ultra, and I hardly use the cards because of the dull colors and soft image, and the FSAA is unusable. The gamma is also way too dark on games older than 2000-2001
As for the G400 MAX, long in the tooth, and the Voodoo5, bereft of driver support, not being able to handle newer games? Like what? Yeah, possibly Halo or Unreal2, but both play Giants, Sacrifice, Mercedes Benz Truck Racing, Superbike 2001, Alice, Undying, Insane, Deus Ex, and UT fine for me on my 800 Thunderbird. Even the Nascar4 demo runs at 40-45 fps with one car on the track, though I haven't played the game yet and I know it slows down a lot with more cars. The last set of 3dfx WHQL drivers are even more stable than anything Matrox has put out.
As for QuakeIII and Serious Sam, yeah, I have to turn the textures and details to medium to play well, but at least it's still at 1024x768. On all the old QuakeII-engine games, which I still haven't finished yet, both cards reign supreme with game compatibility and visuals.
I run multiple OSs, so I will be running both cards with Win98 SE well into the future. The only card I might opt for in the future is a G800 if it allows >70 fps at 1280x1024 and higher (so no need FSAA), or if Nvidia incorporates Rampage or 3dfx technology in a future card. The Geforce line of cards are crap and only good for getting a good 3DMark2001 score.
Comment