View Full Version : Max might be gold on Intel but its POS as usual on SS7

28th June 1999, 16:00
For those of you who have SS7 like me and are thinking about buying G400 REG or MAX (I'm not) make sure you have read Anand's Super 7 video card roundup.
It gives a pretty good outlook on most of the cards out, and as forseen, MAX was not a stellar card on SS7 machines, just as g200 choked. Whats specially surprising is its dismal performance levels at lower resolutions, the ones that people ACTUALLY use! I mean, who REALLY runs Q2 at 1600? Not anyone with less than a 21 inch screen. The more usable resolutions, such as 1024, MAX is really at the bottom of the scale as compared to TNT2 or V3. And this is just in Q2, where features such as Bump Mapping is NOT enabled...I would like to see a benchmark that has it enabled for the MAX. Considering the lack of performance and also the high price (is MAX the most expensive of the ones tested?) I'd say you save that 200+ dollars and invest it in a share of Yahoo instead!


28th June 1999, 16:10
Once again... such a limited view of the universe... news flash, there are more games in the world then Q2 and Q3...

I don't mean this a a direct flame... just some food for thought.

BTW... if it is faster at 1024X768 then it is at 640X480... why would anyone bother to complain? BTW... Ant's benchmarks are probably more reliable since he had a new card... and more familier with setting up Matrox gear... Anand is good at mobo's reviews, but his video card benchmarks are not the most reliable around.


28th June 1999, 16:23
Yep quake 2 is one game, one I was never interested in. Makes for rather boring reading at Anand since everything I have is

28th June 1999, 16:27
I think you would also like to view more than the one review. I hate to say this but Anand has become quite biased over the past year. He has also been known to not post the most accurate info in the world.

There are several reviews around the internet for you to read. I would recommend you read them all before coming to any final conclusions.

The last I read, the only card worth anything on a SS7 board is the Voodoo's. At least according to Anand.

Flangor StrongAxe

System specs: One bourbon, one scotch and one beer

28th June 1999, 18:20
You should all take all current MAX reviews for what they are, reviews of a beta board running beta drivers. The performance you see from these reviews is going to change very much for the better with the new drivers. As soon as I'm allowed a review version of the new prototype I'll have some juicey numbers for you.

29th June 1999, 00:17
I think AMD fans/owners (myself included) are going to have to face the fact that the faster cards get, the worse their performance is likely to be on the K6 http://forums.gagames.com/forums/frown.gif
Every review has said just how CPU dependant the G400 is, but they are wrong. It's a graphics card, that means it's FPU dependant. Bad news for the K6-2 300 in my home machine http://forums.gagames.com/forums/frown.gif
WAIT! I can hear the torches being lit! There is good news too http://forums.gagames.com/forums/smile.gif
The good (read f'ing great) news for AMD fans is that the K7 FPU is anything up to 43%faster than the Pentium III, which means a G400 paired with a K7 600 will easily outstrip a PIII-800 with one http://forums.gagames.com/forums/smile.gif

Electric Amish
29th June 1999, 00:55
I don't think it's a processor problem. I think it is the super7 platform that needs some serious re-work. If a decent super7 board could be made I would definitely consider the AMD processors, but until then...I have to stick with the industry leader.


29th June 1999, 01:32
I quickly read Anand's review. There's an underlying theme that needs to be restated - Socket 7 processors weren't really ment to handle AGP cards. Anand points out that many of the problems associated w/ AGP cards and Super7 mobo's relates to the chipsets on the motherboard.

It seems that full compatability for AGP lies on a mobo designed for AGP (i.e. a BX mobo).

As a side note, I'm running a G400 OEM on a Intel Tabor motherboard and am very pleased with the results that the G400 provides!

29th June 1999, 02:29
I personally had a lot of problems with my SS7 system. I had an AMD K6-2 300 MHz chip with a Soyo 5EHM board, VIA MVP3. The system was fairly stable as long as I didn't install any of the VIA drivers, with the exception of the IRQ steering driver. Performance was not too impressive, and I kept trying to tweak better AGP performance out of it without much success.

Went to a friend's house who had just purchased an Intel 350 MHz system with the Intel i740 video card. Had a good laugh at his video card, until I saw its performance under the Final Reality benchmark. Demo wasn't jerky and the AGP 16 Mb benchmark was very smooth with upwards of 90 fps. Mine was about 26 fps. This pissed me off. I'm not a fps fanatic, but I had rationalized that some of the stuttering graphics I was witnessing on my system was probably common to others with similar systems. Knowing that the G200 was a superior card to the i740 just made things worse.

I was also experiencing some strange problems with busmastering and CDROM, CDRW, sound, and hard drive problems.

Finally decided to stop fighting. I had broken down earlier with DR-DOS and switched to MS-DOS back in '92 when I noticed games ran slower on the alternative OS. Broke down in '95 and bought a Soundblaster and turned in my Aria 16se and my Logitech Soundman; I got tired of playing DOS games in 8-bit mono mode.

Turned in my rebel hat back in January and bought an Intel BI440ZX motherboard with onboard SB64 PCI audio and plugged in a Celeron 333 PPGA chip. Definitely not a tweakers or an overclockers dream, but I was looking mostly for stability. Runs flawlessly. G200 does not stutter when playing Half-Life, audio doesn't cutout, and drives are all running fine with DMA enabled. Baldur's Gate running great with EAX enabled also.

SS7 stability and performance seems to be a hit-or-miss type thing. I know that Kruzin and others are happy with their system. Most happy G200 owners, however, appear to be in the Intel camp.

29th June 1999, 06:19
Well, you have to keep in mind that given how incredibly pro-Matrox Kruzin is, he would probably be "happy" with his system if it was an AMD 5x86 75MHz with a G200. http://forums.gagames.com/forums/wink.gif


29th June 1999, 06:38
I'm never "happy" that's why I constantly tweak. http://forums.gagames.com/forums/wink.gif However, I have no idea where anyone got the idea I use an SS7...never have, never will http://forums.gagames.com/forums/biggrin.gif

P2-350(@103*4=412), Asus P2B(1009), 128meg PC100, MillG400 32meg(PD5.20.???), CL SB Live!Value, CL PC-DVD, Mitsumi CD-R, WD UDMA 8.4&6.4 gig, (2)USR 56k(multilinked), 3Com 905B-TX, etc...

29th June 1999, 07:05
Sorry about the confusion, Kruzin. I've been reading the board for about a year and must have got you mixed up with one of the regulars who was helping me on the AGP setup for my old VIA board. Maybe his name was Shane? Does that ring a bell?

Andrew D
29th June 1999, 14:24
Try Joel.