G800 anyone ?
Paul-RS
Silly question I guess but here goes:
Anyone know anything about the G800 ?
Roughly when we might be expecting it to appear ?
What we are expecting of it ?
Paul.
Zero
Cyber
paul.r....@btinternet.com says...
>
> Silly question I guess but here goes:
>
> Anyone know anything about the G800 ?
>
> Roughly when we might be expecting it to appear ?
>
> What we are expecting of it ?
>
> Paul.
>
>
>
>
You *WILL* be amazed. ;)
Csire Gábor [RiddleR]
Paul-RS <paul.r....@btinternet.com> az alábbiakat írta a következő
hírüzenetben: iu66pscrh82gagmr9...@4ax.com...
-=ENIGMA=-
Geforce 2 MX & the Quadro2 MX which both have their version of Duel head
called Twinview technology! Seems Matrox will be having some competition, &
judging from the specs.. will blow the competition away.
"Csire Gábor [RiddleR]" <rid...@mail.digitel2002.hu> wrote in message
news:3993...@andromeda.datanet.hu...
J.J.
"Paul-RS" <paul.r....@btinternet.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:iu66pscrh82gagmr9...@4ax.com...
>
> Silly question I guess but here goes:
>
> Anyone know anything about the G800 ?
>
> Roughly when we might be expecting it to appear ?
>
> What we are expecting of it ?
>
> Paul.
>
>
>
and another question, what will it cost us? =)
Someone
I would choose the stability and image quality of a Matrox card over ANY
Nvidia product, the Nvidia hardware might have great specs but the
drivers are almost completely unusable they are extremely unstable (at
best) and each version seems to introduce more incompatibility issues
(Switching between different versions of the drivers just to play a game
is no fun at all).
Nvidia have had plenty of time to come up with a stable driver and time
and time again they failed, instead of making a stable driver they add
more features. This is the wrong approach to take, why don't they do as
other hardware vendors do and write a basic driver first, make it stable
and only then add the "bells and whistles".
The image quality of the Nvidia cards also sucks despite having 300Mhz+
RAMDACS the image quality could be described as "fuzzy" at best and the
colour defination is not a patch on a Matrox card.
So what if the G400 isn't the fastest card around but it is far better
made and had far more stable drivers than any Nvidia card (especially the
Gefarce series).
As long as the G800 has the same picture quality as the G400 and the
performance is atleast near to the best card around (at time of release)
then I would almost definitely buy one.
On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 07:41:16 GMT, -=ENIGMA=-(Spo...@home.com) was heard
to utter...
> It better be up to par with Nvidia products... They are coming out with the
> Geforce 2 MX & the Quadro2 MX which both have their version of Duel head
> called Twinview technology! Seems Matrox will be having some competition, &
> judging from the specs.. will blow the competition away.
> "Csire Gábor [RiddleR]" <rid...@mail.digitel2002.hu> wrote in message
--snip--
Mark A. Odell
@news1.gvcl1.bc.home.com>:
>It better be up to par with Nvidia products... They are coming out with the
>Geforce 2 MX & the Quadro2 MX which both have their version of Duel head
Still won't work on Win2K, the OS path for all Windows users. WinME will mark
the end of the 16/32-bit hack OS (at least that's the latest from MS and they
said that about Win98).
--
- Mark (email information at http://www.embeddedfw.com)
Optimize only if it runs too slowly or does not fit, use spaces instead of
tabs.
FicU
Nvidia's image quality sux compared to Matrox in both 3D and 2D. Smart
gamers know that the human eye cannot see a diff between 60fps or 300fps.
So what if a GTS can do twice the fps a G400 can at a res I'd like to play
my games in...you can't see the diff, but what you can see is the image
quality that Matrox boasts over current Nvidia products. So long as Matrox
continues to reign as the king of image quality and provide acceptable fps
at decent res, there is no way I'm going with a Nvidia product.
"Steven" <Ste...@nospam.pls> wrote in message
news:3994...@212.18.160.197...
> I seriously hope you're joking...
>
> "Someone" <x@x.x> wrote in message
news:8n1l1d$3db$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > Up to par with Nvidia? LOL!!!
> >
> > I would choose the stability and image quality of a Matrox card over ANY
> > Nvidia product, the Nvidia hardware might have great specs but the
> > drivers are almost completely unusable they are extremely unstable (at
> > best) and each version seems to introduce more incompatibility issues
> > (Switching between different versions of the drivers just to play a game
> > is no fun at all).
> >
> > Nvidia have had plenty of time to come up with a stable driver and time
> > and time again they failed, instead of making a stable driver they add
> > more features. This is the wrong approach to take, why don't they do as
> > other hardware vendors do and write a basic driver first, make it stable
> > and only then add the "bells and whistles".
> >
> > The image quality of the Nvidia cards also sucks despite having 300Mhz+
> > RAMDACS the image quality could be described as "fuzzy" at best and the
> > colour defination is not a patch on a Matrox card.
> >
> > So what if the G400 isn't the fastest card around but it is far better
> > made and had far more stable drivers than any Nvidia card (especially
the
> > Gefarce series).
> >
> > As long as the G800 has the same picture quality as the G400 and the
> > performance is atleast near to the best card around (at time of release)
> > then I would almost definitely buy one.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 07:41:16 GMT, -=ENIGMA=-(Spo...@home.com) was heard
> > to utter...
> > > It better be up to par with Nvidia products... They are coming out
with the
> > > Geforce 2 MX & the Quadro2 MX which both have their version of Duel
head
Hans Jørgensen
Steven wrote:
Damn' .. please stop using base64-encoding in your posts ?
send as clean text?
--
Hans Jørgensen - Boris - #Linux.dk & #Danmark on the Undernet
ICQ2969623 / http://ph33r.dk / mail: hans at ph33r.dk (nospam@ virker ikke)
.."The question isn't are you paranoid, but are you paranoid enough." - ??
Mike from Seattle
-MB
"Zero" <Ze...@media.net> wrote in message news:3993...@212.18.160.197...
> A good card with shit drivers.
>
> >
Alexander Freudenberg
"Paul-RS" <paul.r....@btinternet.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:iu66pscrh82gagmr9...@4ax.com...
> Anyone know anything about the G800 ?
> Roughly when we might be expecting it to appear ?
> What we are expecting of it ?
This is from:
http://www.matroxusers.com/#G800 Specs?
a.. Available September 2000
b.. Introduction August 2000
c.. 250MHz DDR RAM clock (GF2: 166)
d.. 3 pixels/clockcycle, 3 textures/pixel (G400MAX 2/1; GF2: 4/2)
e.. Fillrate 600 MPixels, respectively 1800 MTexels (G400MAX 300/300; GF2:
800/1600)
f.. T&L unit with 20-30 million polys/sec
g.. DualChip setup capability
Thanks for this thread - I was almost ready to buy a Geforce 2 Ultra. But
what you wrote about the nVidia drivers and their stability, prevented me to
do so.
All I have to do know, is to wait a bit longer ;-)
AF.
Alexander Freudenberg
"Alexander Freudenberg" <a_freu...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:8nr7fq$92s9n$1...@ID-6343.news.cis.dfn.de...
> This is from:
> http://www.matroxusers.com/#G800 Specs?
>
> a.. Available September 2000
> b.. Introduction August 2000
> c.. 250MHz DDR RAM clock (GF2: 166)
> d.. 3 pixels/clockcycle, 3 textures/pixel (G400MAX 2/1; GF2: 4/2)
> e.. Fillrate 600 MPixels, respectively 1800 MTexels (G400MAX 300/300; GF2:
> 800/1600)
> f.. T&L unit with 20-30 million polys/sec
> g.. DualChip setup capability
>
> Thanks for this thread - I was almost ready to buy a Geforce 2 Ultra. But
> what you wrote about the nVidia drivers and their stability, prevented me
to
> do so.
> All I have to do know, is to wait a bit longer ;-)
Here is the original document:
http://www.3dcenter.de/news/archiv-06-00.php3#18-06-00-2
Some words (translations) regarding the information in this article:
* the specifications are of course totally inofficial and will be denied by
Matrox until release
* Matrox will use the best available memory (maybe DDR FCRAM, FCRAM**)
(don't ask me, what this is)
** this is from http://www.matroxusers.com
AF.
Mark A. Odell
@ID-6343.news.cis.dfn.de>:
>* the specifications are of course totally inofficial and will be denied by
>Matrox until release
>* Matrox will use the best available memory (maybe DDR FCRAM, FCRAM**)
>(don't ask me, what this is)
From http://www.eet.com/story/OEG19990208S0021:
TOKYO — Fujitsu Ltd. and Toshiba Corp. today extended their memory
development agreement to include high-speed Fast Cycle RAMs (FCRAMs).
FCRAMs use an advanced cell design and command set to increase speed beyond
what can be achieved with a conventional DRAM, the companies said. The memory
is designed for use in graphics and multimedia markets that require high-
speed access times. The two companies said FCRAMs could also be used as
buffers for printers and telecommunications devices and for high-performance
PCs.
Also from EETimes.com:
Like conventional DDR and SDRAM or Rambus memories, FCRAMs include multiple
banks to reduce random cycle bottlenecks. But the FCRAM technology lets the
memory controller issue addresses every 20 to 30 nanoseconds, thus
eliminating the "bubble" effect when addresses are issued from the same bank.
In other DRAMs, the controller must wait 60 to 70 ns to issue another command
for the next address if it falls in the same bank.
Fujitsu's FCRAMs include eight banks, according to the company.
Fujitsu further claims that under certain conditions, FCRAMs exhibit a 50
percent reduction in operating current compared with conventional SDRAMs
because of their segmented memory core. The company is betting that both
advantages will stimulate interest in the FCRAM among applications that need
high-performance memory, such as digital TVs, still cameras, videodisks, set-
top boxes and such telecommunications and network products as routers, mobile
phones, personal digital assistants and network servers.