Matrox vs Nvidia

[MJoshi]

Hi,

I have a Matrox Millenium II graphics card (MIL2A/8) and a Nvidia GeForce 2 MX400 graphics card and wanted to know which is better out of the two?

 

[BenSkywalker]

For gaming the GeForce would absolutely obliterate the Matrox- the MilleniumII is realisticly a 2D only board and is much older then any GeForce. What are you planning on doing with them?

 

[rstrohkirch]

...for what exactly

 

[MJoshi]

I am not really a gamer so I would probably just use everyday office applications and video/audio editing.

 

[Mojoed]

Originally posted by: MJoshi
I am not really a gamer so I would probably just use everyday office applications and video/audio editing.

Millenium II is superior for 2D.

 

[ddogg]

Millenium for 2D, Geforce for 3D.

 

[TheRyuu]

Both those cards are only badically good for 2D. I wouldn't expect to do any gaming on them.

I would say, that the minimum for gaming (for me) would be either a 9600 or 9800pro on ATI side, or a 6600GT on the Nvidia side.

 

[destrekor]

yea, that geforce won't net you any results in modern games, so since that narrows the column to only 2d applications, Matrox wins. Destroys is the better term.

 

[oxid]

I game on a gf 2 mx 400

 

[mwmorph]

The millenium is excellent for 2d. It will give you sharper text overall, espicalyl at higher resolutions.

 

[Topweasel]

Ah the days when no one could beat a MMII\SLI VOODOO II setup.

 

[Acanthus]

2d matrox
3d nvidia

 

[MJoshi]

So just to confirm, will the Matrox Millenium II be better for analysing detail on audio waveforms and video editing?

 

[BW86]

Matrox hands down if your not gaming.

 

[MJoshi]

I was comparing the specifications of both cards and the nVidia GeForce 2 has more memory (32MB) and a faster clock/processor speed than the Matrox Millenium II (8MB).

Does this have much of an impact on 2D graphics?

 

[BobDaMenkey]

Practically none.

I voted for the Geforce before I read you didn't want to game on it. I'd use the millinium if i wasn't going to be gaming at all.

 

[mindless1]

In general, no, gpu and memory speed are not relevant at typical 2D resolutions. It's possible if you tried to play HD video, that would be bottlenecked by either card though.


Perhaps more important a question is, why sweat over 2 $10 value cards? You have them, right? Throw one in and try it, then the other.

 

[MJoshi]

If I purchased a GeForce 6200 Turbo Cache 256MB TV DVI PCI-E graphics card, would the 2D performance be better than the Matrox Millenium II?

I think the GeForce 6200 is suitable for use with HD - which I may require at a later stage.

What does the Turbo Cache mean? The memory is quoted as 64MB in the specifications?

 

[Gamingphreek]

If I purchased a GeForce 6200 Turbo Cache 256MB TV DVI PCI-E graphics card, would the 2D performance be better than the Matrox Millenium II?

First off we were referring to quality, not the speed. Furhtermore, what kind of 2D performance are you looking for!? You can only render a windows menu so fast.

I think the GeForce 6200 is suitable for use with HD - which I may require at a later stage.

I cannot remember but i believe that the 6200's PVP is too slow to do any serious HD encoding/decoding.

What does the Turbo Cache mean? The memory is quoted as 64MB in the specifications?

It means it has 64mb of memory on the actual video card. The rest is your system memory getting channeled through the high speed PCI-E Bus. Not worth it IMO.

If you were looking to upgrade, you better make sure that:
A. Your motherboard supports the proper signaling voltage if it is AGP and you are looking for an AGP card.
B. Supports PCI-E (fi you are looking for a PCI-E card), right now your cards are AGP or possibly even PCI v.2.1

I would look at the 6600GT (or above) if you want any HD acceleration. Past that you may want to consider waiting for Nvidia's new low end parts (I haven't heard any word on ATI's new low end parts with AVIVO, but they are also worth a good look should you hear anything about them). Considering your current cards though i doubt your system can handle such speedy graphics cards.

-Kevin

 

[Gamingphreek]

Hmm thats the first time i have ever double posted. Forums are still recuperating a little.

-Kevin

 

[MJoshi]

I will be building a new system shortly with a motherboard that does support PCI and PCI-E.

So, I am wondering if I can use my existing graphics cards or if I should invest in a better one?

I will be doing some video editing and maybe HD later on.

What would you recommend in the same price range as the GeForce 6200TC?

If nVidia are due to launch a new chipset for low-end graphics cards, I don't mind waiting so long as I can use the existing card I have in the meantime?

 

[A554SS1N]

If you're after PCI-Express, you might want to take a look at Anandtech's 7300GS review - it's got the hardware coding stuff H.??? and would be able to support high 2D resolutions, and if you ever did require 3D performance, it would be Ok for that too - I've seen them going qquite cheaply already.

 

[hans007]

Originally posted by: MJoshi
I was comparing the specifications of both cards and the nVidia GeForce 2 has more memory (32MB) and a faster clock/processor speed than the Matrox Millenium II (8MB).

Does this have much of an impact on 2D graphics?

pretty much 0. the matrox cards tend to have very clean analog signal output. most geforce 2 mx's werente remotely as good.


8mb of ram is enough for 1600x1200 @ 32bits. if you want to decode like mpg2 though, the gf2mx might have some hardware decoding for that (not sure anymore) since i know cards of that vintage some had them ( iknow the rage128 ati had that)

 

[pkme2]

I have a Matrox Parhelia 256MB 8X AGP set up to run triple monitors for video editing. The Matrox card is in its element and if I wanted to play games, its not suited to match Nvidia.
I use my old 4X 128MB Matrox Parhelia on my Graphics machine to work my PhotoShop, Illustrator and Dreamweaver with ease.
I do have an 9700 Pro 128mb AGP on my Linux machine but if I wanted to play games, this would be the place, maybe.
I agree that the Matrox cards are aok for 2D graphics, but I'm building a Dual Core Graphics Workstation that will house a Fire GL V3100 or V5100 pci-e card.
You can get some great deals if you patient to look; that how I try to do it. My advice is just that, you choose.

 

[Styler2K]

How would the Matrox cards (like the Parhelia, P750 or even the P650) compare to the Nvidia Quadro line? Do Quadro cards also have the seperate "hardware" per channel? Like, Matrox boasts that they have dual independent RGB/DVI-out at 400MHz each. Do Quadro have the equivalent or better technology?