This is not the power of Matrox

[franklar]

Je puis parler anglais assez bien, mais peu probable je ne parle pas
français, mais Altavista fait la traduction pour moi

Quoi qu'il en soit ne vous inquiétez pas, il était juste de petits
offtopic

[Wulfman]

wenn das hier jeder macht bringt das überhaupt nix

(sorry)

mfg
wulfman

[ckj]

My opininion is that Matrox will release a good card for everyone (picture quality, speed in games, video) for christmas 2001.
It will not be the best for games but enough to change my old marvel G400 which is suffering with actual games.

What do you think of that ?

[Pace]

The point of my post was to make you realise that Matrox are indeed lacking in the area you mention, but they have been at the top in the past. Just give them time to get out their next (real ) generation card out that damned door and then we can make comment that they've left whatever market.

Matrox have an excellent footing in various segments of various markets, a slight lapse in this area doesn't mean they've left...

Just a shame I wrapped up a (possibly) valid point in a flame, but there you go :-)

Arrivederci, Paolo.

[Kruzin]

There does need to be a mark in that little "comparison" under "Pro" for the Matrox cards.
Pros of all sorts use Matrox cards. My G450 rules for the AutoCAD work I use it for. Banks and financial institutions love the MMS and DualHead features of Matrox cards. Web designers, graphics artists, etc. etc. etc.
The only "Pro" that doesn't want to use Matrox cards are "Pro" gamers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Market  |    ATI    |  Nvidia   | Matrox                        |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Home     |   R128    |   TNT2    | G4X0                          |
| Gamers   |   Radeon  |  Geforce3 |   -                           |
| Pro      |     -     |  Quadro3  | GXX0                          |
| Video    |Allinwonder|     -     | Marvel,RRG,RT2X00,DigiSuiteXX |
| Business | Radeon VE | Geforce2MX| G2X0, G4X0                    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[This message has been edited by Kruzin (edited 30 April 2001).]

[franklar]

I'd just like to know why G800 project was wasted away....

[dZeus]

hey I game a lot, but I use a G400

if I want 85 - 90fps sustained (which I want for q3a online), I just turn down all the settings untill I reach that speed. That means that I can run at 800x600x16 with low visual quality set... not too ugly when using, but it certainly doesn't show the power of the q3a engine at these settings.

Though ironically most people with a GeFarce card or faster also use these low settings, as you can see better when using them (vertex lighting gives higher contrast and no dark spots on a map).

[Indiana]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by ckj:
My opininion is that Matrox will release a good card for everyone (picture quality, speed in games, video) for christmas 2001.
It will not be the best for games but enough to change my old marvel G400 which is suffering with actual games.

What do you think of that ?</font>

Would seem quite likely.
But people were saying the exact same thing about xmas 2000 and look what we've got now

[PowerBytes]

In my profession (mechanical engineering)I've never encountered anybody using a NVidia based video-card. This does not surprise me because I also have to encounter a Nvidia based videocard giving a decent output at 1600x1200@80Hz. The only cards so far I know of doing this are the Appian Graphics, Elsa and Matrox cards. Considering their respective prices I would say the Matrox cards are extreme value for money....

[Rob M.]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Kruzin:
There does need to be a mark in that little "comparison" under "Pro" for the Matrox cards.
Pros of all sorts use Matrox cards. My G450 rules for the AutoCAD work I use it for. Banks and financial institutions love the MMS and DualHead features of Matrox cards. Web designers, graphics artists, etc. etc. etc.
The only "Pro" that doesn't want to use Matrox cards are "Pro" gamers.
</font>

If it's as good as the other professional cards, Matrox is severly underpricing the card. It was a shock when the $800 Quadro began to compete with the high-end ($5000+) CAD cards.

Regardless, the gamer market is the market to be shooting for. This is the high end consumer market, if you can't compete in the high end this year, you won't be able to compete in the low end next year.

[Joel]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Regardless, the gamer market is the market to be shooting for. This is the high end consumer market, if you can't compete in the high end this year, you won't be able to compete in the low end next year.</font>

Based on that statement I can tell that you know nothing about the PC industry. OEMs have busines customers that buy PCs by the thousands where a hardcore gamer only buys one video card.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">According to a Jon Peddie Associates (JPA) study for year 2000, the Hardcore Gamers market represents a volume of 1.5 million PCs against 55 million business PCs sold during the same period.</font>

Now you do the math and decide which market represents the greatest source of income from sells.

Joel

[WaR-ped]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by PowerBytes:
In my profession (mechanical engineering)I've never encountered anybody using a NVidia based video-card. This does not surprise me because I also have to encounter a Nvidia based videocard giving a decent output at 1600x1200@80Hz. The only cards so far I know of doing this are the Appian Graphics, Elsa and Matrox cards. Considering their respective prices I would say the Matrox cards are extreme value for money....</font>

ya know another reason why? its because you are working with lines.. (assuming you are using AutoCAD).. you dont need the performance of a GeForce. No wonder the Matrox is fine. Less money, less performance. clarity is a bonus.

My card chokes and dies when I do heavy rendering in Pro Engineer.

The moment that Nvidia decides to get their image quality up to Matrox standards, Matrox will go out of business. I guaruntee it. Matrox just wont be able to compete with the price wars and volume generated by Nvidia.



------------------
.:880Mhz Deathtrap:.

• Lite-On FS020 enclosure w/4 120mm Panaflos and soon a 172mm Nidec
• MSI 694D Pro w/ BIOS 1.6
• 2x800E cC0 Pentium 3 w/ 2xVolcanoII
• SyncMAX(NEC) PC166 VCM SDRAM 4x128mb w/ CAS = 1
• Matrox G400MAX 176/219
• And other non-important stuff like hard drives and a dvd drive
• Pineapples

[Liquid Snake]

Matrox go out of busines? I don't think so. They have a video, imaging and networking division too.

[frankymail]

Ben Franklar, ta traduction, elle schlingue en esti

CU,
Francis

------------------
What was necessary was done yesterday;
We're currently working on the impossible;
For miracles, we ask for a 24 hours notice ...

[WaR-ped]

Ok, well, not entirely out of business, but I can definetly see them pulling out of the video card business for good in the near future. Its simple.

Hypothetical Situations

number One

If i was a business owner and i needed 50 PCs to do office work(thats what matrox cards are good at, right?), I might have a couple options. for $125 per PC I can have them equipped with the Geforce4MX that has a 370Mhz Ramdac and looks pretty sharp compared to their older Geforce3, or I can spend $250 on the G1000 that has a 385Mhz Ramdac. They look pretty close. the Matrox looks more sharp, barely. But considering I dont want to spend an extra $100 bucks per PC on that tiny tiny bit of clarity(the difference is negligible), I will just go with the Nvidia cards.

Second situation. I am a business owner of a small graphics developing company. We arent too big. We deal with making animations for TV commercials lets say. I need 25 PCs that will have the power to animate. We do use large screens and need something that wont go fuzzy at high resolutions or crap out when doing hi resolution animation. My two options are the G1500(that has dual chips, dual 390Mhz RAMDACS and dual Monitors and 32MB DDR SDRAM 128bit width), for $350, and Quadro3(that has a single output, single 380Mhz RAMDAC and 64mb DDR SDRAM and 128bit width) that costs about $500. I dont have to have dual monitor display, but it would be a bonus. Hmm... well, in all the reviews I have read, the Quadro performances 150% better in everything compared to the Matrox. And after getting a chance to really look at both cards 2D performance I can say with certainty that the Quadro3 looks to be G400MAX quality just like the card I used to have in my system a few years back. I think Ill go with that Quadro3 since I need that performance over the need for dual display.

Im not even going to touch the gaming scene since Matrox doesnt want to get close to it themselves.

I dont have issues with their technical people and R&D people. Im sure they are a fine bunch of innovative folks. its the morons in the upper management that are trying to make trends and decide what to sell that I wish would listen to people such as myself more. I think they forgot what a video card does. Its an accelerator. It speeds up the performance of images. simple as that.


just my $.35 and a rant... peace out.