<< For office like there is no need for a g450 get a i810 i815 chipset which is good enough. >>
Wow, I didn't think there was one thing that you could say to make me lose all respect for your opinion, but you managed to prove me wrong.
<< For office like there is no need for a g450 get a i810 i815 chipset which is good enough. >>
Wow, I didn't think there was one thing that you could say to make me lose all respect for your opinion, but you managed to prove me wrong.
Hardware, you don't seem to really understand how great the Matrox cards really are. I'm a gamer and think Nvidia's done a great job in pushing 3D speed and tech, but as a webkid, I gotta give props to Matrox for kicking out the best 2D in the biz.
For serious 2D users spending more than a few hours in front of their computers, matrox makes essential gear.
For serious 2D users spending more than a few hours in front of their computers, matrox makes essential gear.
The mainpoint is teh g450 is simply old.
What do you think if nvidia would develop a new tnt2 (no ultra!) on a 0,18 design with the same core speed! and the same ram speed! We would laugh about them!
What do you think if nvidia would develop a new tnt2 (no ultra!) on a 0,18 design with the same core speed! and the same ram speed! We would laugh about them!
yeah, we'd laugh at them because a .18 tnt2 has no place in the market at all. It's 2D was only adequate, and it's 3D is even worse than a G400.
The benefits or a cheaper G400 with a better second ramdac are obviously lost on you.
The benefits or a cheaper G400 with a better second ramdac are obviously lost on you.
LOL, Hardware it is something about you and that guy Auric that no one can understand. You keep saying its old but can the 2D of the GF2 MX match the 2D of the Matrox at very High Resolution? I don't think so.
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1315&p=10
<< Matrox has always been the king of 2D image quality, and the G450 does nothing to change that title other than reinforce it. The sharp 360MHz RAMDAC the G450 borrowed from the G400MAX provides for a very sharp display at 1600 x 1200 and even at higher resolutions provided that you have a high end monitor capable of displaying such resolutions. >>
<< On our Sony FD Trinitron GDM-F500 display the G450 provided a sharper picture than any competing card we tried, but that is to be expected from Matrox. What was even more impressive was that the image quality of the secondary display at 1600 x 1200 was definitely acceptable. >>
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1315&p=11
Try hearing this kind of praising for an nvidia product. The G450 is doing what it was meant to do and that is it. It was never meant for gaming.
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1315&p=10
<< Matrox has always been the king of 2D image quality, and the G450 does nothing to change that title other than reinforce it. The sharp 360MHz RAMDAC the G450 borrowed from the G400MAX provides for a very sharp display at 1600 x 1200 and even at higher resolutions provided that you have a high end monitor capable of displaying such resolutions. >>
<< On our Sony FD Trinitron GDM-F500 display the G450 provided a sharper picture than any competing card we tried, but that is to be expected from Matrox. What was even more impressive was that the image quality of the secondary display at 1600 x 1200 was definitely acceptable. >>
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1315&p=11
Try hearing this kind of praising for an nvidia product. The G450 is doing what it was meant to do and that is it. It was never meant for gaming.
thats for crisp 2d:
In Bezug auf die Bild- und Signalqualität hebt sich die Matrox Millennium G450 von der Konkurrenz positiv ab. Die Amplitudenhöhe von 653 mV entspricht nicht ganz dem Idealwert von 700 mV. Die Anstiegszeit von 2,55 ns und die Abfallzeit von 3,16 ns sowie die Signalform sind gut. Die RGB-Signale mit guter Deckungsgleichheit und ohne Offsetspannung sind ebenfalls positiv zu bewerten.
ist good but nowhere awesome (still better then the rest of the pack!)
In Bezug auf die Bild- und Signalqualität hebt sich die Matrox Millennium G450 von der Konkurrenz positiv ab. Die Amplitudenhöhe von 653 mV entspricht nicht ganz dem Idealwert von 700 mV. Die Anstiegszeit von 2,55 ns und die Abfallzeit von 3,16 ns sowie die Signalform sind gut. Die RGB-Signale mit guter Deckungsgleichheit und ohne Offsetspannung sind ebenfalls positiv zu bewerten.
ist good but nowhere awesome (still better then the rest of the pack!)
As I told it a desaster:
http://www.tecchannel.de/cgi-bin/printarticle/printarticle.pl?id=hardware/534
http://www.tecchannel.de/cgi-bin/printarticle/printarticle.pl?id=hardware/534
Why would a 200MHz RAMDAC be "unusable"? Following your own argument, you only use 1024x768@85Hz...a 200MHz RAMDAC is more than sufficient to support that...and I don't know where you're getting the 200MHz figure either. The main RAMDAC speed is 360MHz in order to support 2048x1536@85Hz, the secondary RAMDAC can support up to 1600x1200@85Hz I believe, but Matrox didn't reveal its speed.
Again, RAMDAC speed has next to NOTHING to do with the image quality. All it controls is the maximum resolution and refresh rate its able to output. 1600x1200@85Hz is by no means shabby, even though a more balanced one would be desirable.
BTW there's more than a 0.5% market for graphics professionals out there who use 2D graphical software packages such as Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, Illustrator, CorelDraw, etc...its not just for "business office packages" like MS Office, as you seem to believe.
Again, RAMDAC speed has next to NOTHING to do with the image quality. All it controls is the maximum resolution and refresh rate its able to output. 1600x1200@85Hz is by no means shabby, even though a more balanced one would be desirable.
BTW there's more than a 0.5% market for graphics professionals out there who use 2D graphical software packages such as Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, Illustrator, CorelDraw, etc...its not just for "business office packages" like MS Office, as you seem to believe.
360mhz and 200mhz Ramdac works better than just 360mhz Ramdac, this is an improvement from the old G400 and that is good. They wanted this card to be cheap and good, and since very few people have the money to spend on two 21" montiors to run at 1600x1200 then why bother. Most people have maybe a 19" monitor and an old 17", they dont need 1600x1200 on the second display.
Czar: If you need your pc for work 2X22" crt is no money. Its a space problem but no money problem.
Gee Hardware, first you say:
<< We have all 19"-21" crts here and only two of us are using 1600x1200 most are using 1024x768 (even with 21"
and thats for cad >>
Then you say:
<< I only use 1600x1200x32x85 hz which needs a 300 mhz ramdac >>
Make up your mind already! A 360MHz RAMDAC is MORE than enough for 1600x1200x32x85Hz. As Matrox has already claimed, it will do up to 2048x1536@85Hz. No known monitor on the face of the planet earth now will even do that resolution/refresh rate.
As for 1600x1200, Matrox's secondary RAMDAC will ALSO be able to do that, so I don't see much problem. Of course, it would be ideal to have 2 separate 360MHz RAMDACs, but it would bring the price up, and its simply a business decision that Matrox made. Everybody makes comprimises, even nvidia.
<< We have all 19"-21" crts here and only two of us are using 1600x1200 most are using 1024x768 (even with 21"
and thats for cad >>Then you say:
<< I only use 1600x1200x32x85 hz which needs a 300 mhz ramdac >>
Make up your mind already! A 360MHz RAMDAC is MORE than enough for 1600x1200x32x85Hz. As Matrox has already claimed, it will do up to 2048x1536@85Hz. No known monitor on the face of the planet earth now will even do that resolution/refresh rate.
As for 1600x1200, Matrox's secondary RAMDAC will ALSO be able to do that, so I don't see much problem. Of course, it would be ideal to have 2 separate 360MHz RAMDACs, but it would bring the price up, and its simply a business decision that Matrox made. Everybody makes comprimises, even nvidia.
<< The mainpoint is teh g450 is simply old. >>
Anand sure doesn't think so: "Matrox has always been the king of 2D image quality, and the G450 does nothing to change that title other than reinforce it. The sharp 360MHz RAMDAC the G450 borrowed from the G400MAX provides for a very sharp display at 1600 x 1200 and even at higher resolutions provided that you have a high end monitor capable of displaying such resolutions." (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1315&p=10)
<< 2.ramdac is only 200mhz thats near to unusable!!!!! >>
Anand sure doesn't think so: "On our Sony FD Trinitron GDM-F500 display the G450 provided a sharper picture than any competing card we tried, but that is to be expected from Matrox. What was even more impressive was that the image quality of the secondary display at 1600 x 1200 was definitely acceptable." (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1315&p=11) (blatantly ripped from Remedy's post)
You're fighting an argument that you can't possibly win...
3D performance is quantifiable and the G450 lags. The lack of an acceptable (widely reproducible) benchmark for 2D visual quality means that those of us with Matrox cards cannot rigorously convey the beautiful performance achieved by Matrox in display quality. That is really regrettable, because no matter how much you use the 3D performance of your Video card, you are constrained by the 2D performance 100% of the time (even when you are running a 3D game). Since you are reading opinions here (after presumably having read the official reviews) I've got to say that the visual quality of my Matrox G400 is so much better than my other cards, that I sometimes swap the video cards just so I can keep using the G400. I regularly use the following monitors at 1600X1200 for work: 1X22", 2X21", 3X17". I bought a TNT2 card, and brought it back the next day; I was actually startled by the lack of visual quality. I don't think I have seen a review or opinion stating anything other than "Matrox is the king of 2D". I think that the G450 is a disappointment because, while it clearly is a great cost reduction for Matrox, there's no great advantage for customers. If you want the best visual quality, though, Matrox is number 1, and you probably do not know what you are missing.
Hardware, in a way it is about 95 percent of the G400, but the G400 was so good at the Business market that matrox didn't have to do to much R&D to introduce a new card for the biz market again. It wasn't meant to be brought as a gamers card as you can see by the performance. Everyone knows the Rumors of matroxs' next generation graphics card including Anand and John Carmack. So why are you so stuck on beliving the G450 is supposed to pose a threat on the Geforce line when it wasn't intended to compete with it? It was meant for business apps and biz apps only GOT IT?
Hardware, it doesn't MATTER if its an old design, because it still delivers great performance and value to its designated market. The P3 is a 5 year old design, but its current iteration still rivals the newer Athlon.
same speed MAYBE, but lower cost, that's for sure.. besides, if you are worried about speed, you can overclock it. it's not a big deal.
"As far I know the G450 costs more then the g400 32mb dual!!!"
umm.. k it costs LESS to produce, they sell it for less, but the people who sell it now, are probably selling it for more, becuase naturally, it's a G450, compared to a G400, so people are going to pay for it. ALso, there's a thing called supply and demand. if the supply is low, and demand is high, price goes up. not necessarily from Matrox themselves.
umm.. k it costs LESS to produce, they sell it for less, but the people who sell it now, are probably selling it for more, becuase naturally, it's a G450, compared to a G400, so people are going to pay for it. ALso, there's a thing called supply and demand. if the supply is low, and demand is high, price goes up. not necessarily from Matrox themselves.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter