PDA

View Full Version : ANT! No test with 5.30 TurboGL yet?



Sharkyz
11th October 1999, 14:04
I mean, it's not a huge download...
And only a few second to report what you find about TurboGL little gain.
Everybody need your report, as the previous release wasn' released to public.
How long have we to wait for?

Ant
11th October 1999, 15:09
I'll be doing it ASAP, I'm afraid at the moment I'm a little tied up but it's next on my list.

tish beta2
14th October 1999, 20:42
When Ant talks about ASAP, he usually means, "Let's see now today I will be tied up. Tomorrow, i'll be taped down, and the rest of the week.. let's just see ok? ."

http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/icons/icon10.gif

CoolBreeze
14th October 1999, 21:50
Greebe,

Are those your benchmark results or the ones you got from FiringSquad?...Cuz, i find that hard to believe!

------------------
P3 500(not overclocked)
128 MB PC100 SDRAM
SE440BX-2 Motherboard by Intel
Seagate 8.4 gig HDD
Diamond MX300 Sound Card
AOpen 40x CD ROM
Ethernet 32 bit PCI Card
Motorola Cable Modem
Matrox G400 32 OEM Single Head @150
17" CRT Monitor
Altec Lansing 2 Speakers and Sub

----CoolBreeze aka KAST----

Kx30
14th October 1999, 23:05
Coolbreeze , he benchmarked q2 not q3 ..

Micko
14th October 1999, 23:15
well..
I get 82 fps in demo1.dm2 at 1024x748 16bit and i have P3-560MHz...

Micko,
yes, all at highest settings.

Snake-Eyes
15th October 1999, 06:25
CoolBreeze- it's not just you, every manufacturer has taken to overhyping their cards' performance.

Kx30- If you are TombMan, what ever happened to the whole benchmarking thing using 3DMark99Max on your system vs. the results I gave you from mine (I used to be known as Bogey)? And I agree that if you are Tombman/Deprived, you've really shown a lot more restraint on these forums than you were.

------------------
Ace

LAMFDTK
15th October 1999, 06:26
Kx30,
If you are tombman or deprived I want you to know that I hate you still....heheheh

Nah

troop
15th October 1999, 09:25
Here's another very helpful thing MURC might do : @ 600Mhz , run the MAX on 3DMark99
and publish the full results. The test can be another benchmark where , eg , I can evaluate the AGP speed I achieve .

Thx,

------------------
In Harm's Way

Grimace
15th October 1999, 12:31
Firing Squad admitted that they messed up. The 71FPS at 1024 was really at 640. So the only thing left is to see what Ant's numbers are and the matter should? be cleared up.

CoolBreeze
15th October 1999, 16:49
Greebe,

Oh thanx Kx30, i must of missed the q2...i thought it was q3...my mistake...well i dont give a rats ass about Q2...How bout benchmark Q3 map 1 with everything on and lets see what that K7 can do!

------------------
P3 500(not overclocked)
128 MB PC100 SDRAM
SE440BX-2 Motherboard by Intel
Seagate 8.4 gig HDD
Diamond MX300 Sound Card
AOpen 40x CD ROM
Ethernet 32 bit PCI Card
Motorola Cable Modem
Matrox G400 32 OEM Single Head @150
17" CRT Monitor
Altec Lansing 2 Speakers and Sub

----CoolBreeze aka KAST----

CoolBreeze
15th October 1999, 16:56
Kx30,

If you are tombman or deprived...id like to say you are really handling yourself much more maturly now, and im starting to understand where u are coming from...Dont get me wrong..i still think that the G400 is still the best card ive owned and i am happy with the performance...but i got to think...why am i seeing these higher numbers on machines equal or lesser value to my PC(ANT's, and Firing Squads's Scores)...Its not just Matrox...but every video card ive seen...none of them live up to the hype of the performace that the press or the manufacture releases in advanced...or is it just me?

------------------
P3 500(not overclocked)
128 MB PC100 SDRAM
SE440BX-2 Motherboard by Intel
Seagate 8.4 gig HDD
Diamond MX300 Sound Card
AOpen 40x CD ROM
Ethernet 32 bit PCI Card
Motorola Cable Modem
Matrox G400 32 OEM Single Head @150
17" CRT Monitor
Altec Lansing 2 Speakers and Sub

----CoolBreeze aka KAST----

KvHagedorn
17th October 1999, 01:15
Alright, let's dispense with the "IF you are tombman or deprived" here. How many people with a Sony GDM-F500 from the same isp as tomby would appear miraculously on this forum on the day deprived was banned? hmm... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
Kind Regards,

KvH

Kx30
18th October 1999, 22:32
hehe , sometimes i just love being who i am .
BTW , i donīt consider a F500 a rare monitor .
All my friends , among them tombman and deprived , have one ;-))

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAH

I canīt stop enjoying being in this forum :-)
It is a fact that i have a g400max , a tnt2ultra (creative) and V2sli (creative). I donīt need other peopleīs reviews or opinions because i can compare those three cards directly and i can tell you : NVIDIA rules ! Use real games (not 3dmark!) and you will see not only tnt2u is the fastest (yes , even faster than g400max) BUT THE MOST MATURE PRODUCT there is when it comes to graphic cards and drivers !
Nvidia doesnīt need no stinking turbogl driver which only works with PIII/K7 anyway and has no support for flares in q3 .
I have benchmarked the tnt2ultra and g400max
with turbogl and they both have the same scores now in q3 BUT when the scene gets
complex g400max has more problems with it than tnt2ultra . (just watch the gibs and the portals !!!). In UT V2SLI (or V3) and glide are still kings , there is no way this could change .
In half life the tnt2ultra is MUCH faster than g400max with turboGL AND of course faster than v2sli.
(i use a special cfg for maximum quality and details in half life)

For me it is clear that Nvidia is technology leader because : while matrox is still working on the drivers Nvidia has a NEXT GEN product :-)

I would like to point out that ALL THAT I HAVE EVER SAID IS ONLY PART OF MY OPINION AND DIDN`T WANT TO INSULT ANYONE PERSONALLY !
If you do not agree with me than this is not a reason for you to start a flame war and (yes , i mean you ant) is no reason for banning me.

I AM BACK
(in fact i never left :-)

Sean Segel
18th October 1999, 23:27
Hi Kx30,

If frames meant everything then the 32-bit rendering would not be a factor. Let me briefly state that the small frame loss noticed using the Matrox G400 is made up by its superior visual quality. I have owned an Asus TNT2 Ultra and a Hercules TNT2 Ultra and I can tell you that Matrox wins hands down.

The latest Nvidia Geforce offering is getting close to matching the visual quality of the G400. In the one of the latest Geforce reviews at Singapore Hardware zone, the reviewer had this to say about the visual quality differences between the two cards on the 3dmark99:

The GeForce picture quality has really improved as compared to the TNT2. There is very little difference between the G400Max and the GeForce 256. However, if you take a closer look, the G400Max still produces sharper images (compare the 3D Mark logo near the center of the image).

So there you have it the Matrox G400 Max is ahead of its time topping even Nvidia's latest offering in visual quality.

Thanks,

Sean

Kx30
19th October 1999, 00:09
oh yeah , like 15 Mtris/s means nothing when the g400 has NO T&L !
I guess it is clear who is ahead of its time.

Sean Segel
19th October 1999, 01:18
I didn't say that the Matrox G400 was ahead of the Geforce features wise. I did say that the G400 leads the pack when it comes to image quality.

As far as Geforce T&L support is concerned there basically is none right now, with the exception of the flashy demos that are included with the card. When T&L support is enabled games, the Geforce will have visuals that will start to surpass the Matrox G400.

One thing the Geforce may never surpass the G400 in is "crispness".

Thanks,

Sean

KvHagedorn
19th October 1999, 01:24
Hey, Sean. Hang on to that Herc ultra. It should be a collectors item someday.

------------------
Kind Regards,

KvH