Announcement

**rylan** · 19 June 2001, 05:11

Sorry, M dropped the bomb on us, and basically flipped us the bird while they drove off.

I highly doubt it'll be much faster than a MAX, and probably will have trouble competing with a nicely overclocked MAX... 64-bit ddr bus.. how pathetic.. even the cards my conpany designs (which are high-res 2D only for medical use) have 128-bit wide DDR.

Headcasting.. lol.. I'm not even going to comment on that again.

**windigo** · 19 June 2001, 05:24

-----However, the card is the basis for future products but they have to increase the core speed, move to 128b ddr, include a good fast dx8 compliant T&L unit and include some of the other goodies that ATI and Nvidia users can take for granted.-----
the future was supposed to be this card I think my next card wont ever be a Matrox if this the best they can do because by the time they something get something as fast a Gforce 1 Nvidia will already own the low mid and high end even Matrox's coveted OEM suppliers cant justify lowsy 3d performance to their customers forever.

------------------
MSI K7TPro2 Duron 750@900
512Ram G400DH32mb
Pioneer SCSI 16xDVD
msn messenger id: mkanashta

**mdhome** · 19 June 2001, 06:38

Matrox obviously thinks differently about the matter than either me or you. I just get the impression that this card has been deliberately crippled just so that they could make it pin comptible with the G450. The only reasons for this would be cost. Thinking about it, the card has similar specs to most of its competitors ie MX and Radeon LE and should hopefully compete with them on performance. It isnt intended to compete with the Radeon or GTS2 and as such uses a cutdown memory system . It is also in the spec range that most oems ship with new PC's. However lets not forget what quality is really about. This card is going to be one of the best in its category.

Now before some of you people start complaining that this card isnt a Geforce Killer, you must realise that the small band of vociferous voices on these forums are miniscule compared to the huge numbers of people out there who really dont care. All they want is a reasonable card at a reasonable price. This can be illustrated quite easily. I visit approximately 2 computer fairs in my local area each month. The vast majority of the graphics cards on display and being sold are Nvidia MX made by unknown companies in Asia with an average cost of £60-£75. You occasionally see a Radeon or GF2 and for the really budget conscious a few of the older ati cards. Nowhere can be seen Matrox cards. Up to now, this was because they couldnt compete in price and or performance. I'm sure the G550 is going to change that and I believe that Matrox believes that.

Frankly for all our moaning, Matrox really doesnt care about our loud voices. We simply dont represent a large enough voice for them to invest in high ended solutions. This will change within the next 12 months as the graphical goalpost gets further away. Then they will have to produce something that goes beyond a rehash of the G400 core and is truely new.

Personally I feel that users being let down by the MJPEG and Win2k issue was a much more insideous state of affairs than the *lack of specs* of this card, which I'm sure Matrox will make a lot of money from.

Lastly, we do have a choice in the matter. Either we stay with Matrox and accept what they produce or go elsewhere. The choice is that simple. It isnt life or death.

enough ranting from me and over to you.

regards Michael

**Lopez** · 19 June 2001, 08:14

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by mdhome:
Lastly, we do have a choice in the matter. Either we stay with Matrox and accept what they produce or go elsewhere. The choice is that simple. It isnt life or death.</font>

So, what do I buy? A Radeon VE, Geforce MX2? Or do I simply forget about two monitors and buy a Kyro II ? Any suggestions are welcome

**bacon** · 19 June 2001, 08:42

I think by the time we will see G550s distrubuted to resellers (not OEMs), there will be GF3MX dual head and Radeon 2 dual head cards on the market.

**mdhome** · 19 June 2001, 09:22

Lopez
Personally I still think that the G550 is still a good candidate for this class of card. If I were you and you were me(!) I'd go for the G550. Assuming it is out in time

Bacon,
I just cant see cut down versions of the Radeon ii or geforce 3 mx being priced in the same category as a G550 just quite yet. Hopefully by then they will have the g500+ ultra versions to contend with

regards MD

**DosFreak** · 19 June 2001, 10:02

One word.

nForce

**bacon** · 19 June 2001, 10:16

I agree with you MD about the pricing, I would imagine a GF3MX or radeon 2 VE to enter around the £150 mark, making the G550 at about £95 very good value for money. I was just giving Lopez some options to what else might be available at the G550s time of release.
DosFreak make a short but bitter point about the Nforce though, it could take a large sector of the business market itself, drastically effecting the G550 business and OEM sales.

**Nuno** · 19 June 2001, 11:30

For people thinking about dual monitors, don´t forget that if you have 2 videocards (1 AGP 1 PCI) you can have dual-monitor feature. Of course you won´t get DH zoom or DVD Max, but there´s another ways into multi-monitor setup rather than Matrox Dual-head, Radeon VE and MX twin-view.

**CHHAS** · 19 June 2001, 11:53

It looks like I'll stick with my G400 for a while longer, I rarely play demanding games so until Unreal 2 comes out (or perhaps Neverwinter Nights) I doubt I'll get a new card.

Shame though, I was really hooked on getting a new Matrox card soon

**mdhome** · 19 June 2001, 16:22

Az
I'd like to be able to convince myself to buy this to replace either my Radeon or my G400 but I cant. When the specs were semi released a month or so ago it looked like we would have 128b ddr, 250 mhz core and 2 texture units per pipeline. This would have made it a must have upgrade. Alas the card has been crippled by it memory subsystems and may not be as highly clocked as I was hopeing. Several people think it will barely scrape past G400 max levels of 3d speed which to be honest leaves me with the impression of a company that doesnt really know what they are doing. If you think about it the G550 looks like an unbalanced design. It has superb 2d but a mish-mash of 3d and memory. The T&L unit( or whatever Matrox wants to call it) looks like a half hearted or should I say their first attempt at T&L. Anandtech has stated that the t&L will be disabled in the drivers for games. Why? Is it that bad or is it a strictly *non* complaint component.

However, the card is the basis for future products but they have to increase the core speed, move to 128b ddr, include a good fast dx8 compliant T&L unit and include some of the other goodies that ATI and Nvidia users can take for granted.

If however, The card is as fast or faster than a MX, then the chances are I will buy one.

ps sorry about the ramblings. Please feel free to flame

regards MD

**Lopez** · 20 June 2001, 01:22

So, what about this combination:

A G450 pci and a Hercules Kyro II agp

Is that going to work at all ??

**rylan** · 20 June 2001, 06:03

Unfortunately, even for a lot of OEMs, a card that is rock-bottem 3D performance (when compared to the other options.. MX, RadeonVE etc) just won't be very attractive.
Why slap G550s in their systems when they can get GF2MXs that (probably) perform better and cost a lot less?

**DuRaNgO** · 20 June 2001, 06:23

Maybe they don't want to go blind when they get older?

Announcement

Who'll get a G550 anyway?

Who'll get a G550 anyway?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment